mm 


ym^m^'^ 


V  •     4   <. —  ^      I     >*•     0 


Christianity  and  Positivism 


A    SERIES    OF 


LECTURES    TO    THE    TIMES 


NATURAL    THEOLOGY  AND  APOLOGETICS. 


Delivered   in   New  York,   Jan.  i6   to   March   20,  1871,  on  the   "Ely 
Foundation"  of  the  Union  Theological  Seminary. 


BY 

JAMES   McCOSH,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

president    of    the    college    of    new    jersey,    PRINCETON. 


NEW  YORK: 
ROBERT  CARTER  AND  BROTHERS, 

530  Broadway. 
1871. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1871,  by 

ROBERT  CARTER  AND  BROTHERS, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  Washington. 


Cambridge: 
press  of  john  wilson  and  son. 


PREFACE. 


This  course  of  Lectures  on  Christianity  and  Posi- 
tivism was  delivered,  by  appointment,  as  the  second 
course  on  the  foundation  established  in  the  Union 
Theological  Seminary  by  Mr.  Zebulon  Stiles 
Ely,  of  New  York,  in  the  following  terms:  — 

"  The  undersigned  gives  the  sum  of  ten  thousand 
dollars  to  the  Union  Theological  Seminary  of  the 
city  of  New  York,  to  found  a  Lectureship  in  the 
same,  the  title  of  which  shall  be  'The  Elias  P.  Ely 
Lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Christianity.' 

"  The  course  of  Lectures  given  on  this  foundation 
is  to  comprise  any  topics  that  serve  to  establish  the 
proposition  that  Christianity  is  a  religion  from  God, 
or  that  it  is  the  perfect  and  final  form  of  religion  for 
man. 

"Among  the  subjects  discussed  may  be,  — 

"  The  Nature  and  Need  of  a  Revelation ; 

"The  Character  and  Influence  of  Christ  and  his 
Apostles ; 

"The  Authenticity  and  Credibility  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, Miracles  and  Prophecy ; 

"  The  Diffusion  and  Benefits  of  Christianity ;  and 

"The  Philosophy  of  Religion  in  its  Relation  to 
the  Christian  System. 


IV  PREFACE. 

"  Upon  one  or  more  of  such  subjects  a  course  ot 
ten  public  Lectures  shall  be  given  at  least  once  in 
two  or  three  years.  The  appointment  of  the  Lect- 
urer is  to  be  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the 
directors  and  faculty  of  said  Seminary  and  the  un- 
dersigned ;  and  it  shall  ordinarily  be  made  two 
years  in  advance. 

"  The  interest  of  the  fund  is  to  be  devoted  to  the 
payment  of  the  Lecturers,  and  the  publication  of 
the  Lectures  within  a  year  after  the  delivery  of  the 
same.  The  copyright  of  the  volumes  thus  published 
is  to  be  vested  in  the  Seminary. 

"In  case  it  should  seem  more  advisable,  the  di- 
rectors have  it  at  their  discretion  at  times  to  use  the 
proceeds  of  this  fund  in  providing  special  courses 
of  lectures  or  instruction,  in  place  of  the  aforesaid 
public  lectures,  for  the  students  of  the  Seminary  on 
the  above-named  subjects. 

"Should  there  at  any  time  be  a  surplus  of  the 
fund,  the  directors  are  authorized  to  employ  it  in 
the  way  of  prizes  for  dissertations  by  students  of 
the  Seminary  upon  any  of  the  above  topics,  or  of 
prizes  for  essays  thereon,  open  to  public  com- 
petition. 

"Zebulon  Stiles  Ely. 

"  New  York,  May  8th,  1865." 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS. 


Preface i" 

CHRISTIANITY  AND    PHYSICAL    SCIENCE. 

Lecture  ^^S^ 

I.  The  Argument  from  Design  as  affected  by 
Modern  Discoveries  in  Science.  —  Conser- 
vation OF  Force.  —  Star  Dust.  —  Proto- 
plasm.—  Origin  of  Life i 

II.  Natural  Selection.  —  Origin  of  Man. —  His- 
torical Development.  —  Christ  and  the 
Moral  Power 35 

III.  Limits  to  the  Law  of  Natural  Selection.— 
This  World  a  Scene  of  Struggle.  —  Ap- 
pearance OF  Spiritual  Life.  —  Final  Cause. 

—  New  Life.  —  Unity  and   Growth  in  the 
World.  —  Higher  Products   coming  forth. 

—  Signs  of  Progress 63 

^zttsnti  .Series* 

CHRISTIANITY  AND    MENTAL    SCIENCE. 

IV.  Proof  of  the  Existence  of  Mind  and  of  its 
possessing  the  Capacity  of  Knowledge. — 
Doctrines  of  Nescience  and  Relativity    .      97 


VI  CONTENTS. 

Lecture  Page 

V.  Mental  Principles  involved  in  the  Theistic 
Argument.  —  Our  Ideas  lead  us  to  believe 
in  God,  and  clothe  him  with  Power,  Per- 
sonality, Goodness,  AND  Infinity. —  God  so 
FAR  Known.  —  Criticism  of  Mr.  Herbert 
Spencer.  —  God   so  far   Unknown    ....     124 

VI.  Progress  of  Free  Thought  in  America.  —  Ra- 

tionalism. —  Boston  Theology.  —  Positivism     i  5 1 

VII.  Materialism. — Circumstances    favoring    it. 

—  Parts  of  the  Body  most  intimately 
connected  with  Mental  Action. —  Gross- 
er AND  more  Refined  Forms  of  Mate- 
rialism. —  BiJcHNER,  Maudesley,  Bain, 
Huxley,  Tyndal,  Spencer.  —  Objections 
to  Materialism.  —  Mind  not  one  of  the 
Correlated  Physical  Forces ijq 


^Tfjirti  Series. 

CHRISTIANITY    AND    HISTORICAL    INVESTI- 
GATION. 

VIII.  Our  Lord's  Life  a  Reality  and  not  a  Ro- 
mance.—  Criticism  of  Renan's  Life  of 
Jesus 206 

IX.  Unity  of  our  Lord's  Life,  —  In  the  Ac- 
counts GIVEN  of  Him, —-In  His  Method  of 
Teaching,  —  In  His  Person, — And  in  His 
Work 255 


CONTENTS.  vii 

Lecture  Page 

X.  The  Planting  of  the  Christian  Church. — 
Legendary  and  Mythic  Theories.  —  Ac- 
cordance OF  THE  Book  of  Acts  with 
Geography  and  History.  —  Coincidences 
BETWEEN  Acts  and  Paul's  Epistles. — Pres- 
ent  Position  of  Christianity 297 


Article 

I.    Gaps  in  the  Theory  of  Development     .    .    .  343 

II.    Darwin's  Descent  of  Man 346 

III.    Principles  of  Herbert  Spencer's  Philosophy  362 


LECTURES   TO  THE   TIMES 

ON 

NATURAL  THEOLOGY  AND  APOLOGETICS. 


The  Argument  from  Design  as  affected  by  Modern 
Discoveries  in  Science.  —  Conservation  of  Force. 
—  Star  Dust.  —  Protoplasm.  —  Origin  of  Life. 

IV/TR.  J.  S.  MILL  recommends  those  who  would 
-^  estabhsh  the  existence  of  God  to  stick  to  the 
argument  from  design.  As  it  is  lawful  to  learn 
wisdom  from  an  opponent,  I  take  his  counsel ;  and 
I  stand  by  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  order  and 
adaptation  in  the  universe.  The  a  -priori  proof,  so 
proudly  advanced  by  the  rationalists  of  the  age  now 
passing  away,  is  not  likely  to  meet  with  much  ac- 
ceptance in  the  time  now  present,  when  rationalism 
is  being  devoured  by  sensationalism,  and  the  tran- 
scendental philosophy,  with  its  much  admired  crys- 
tals, is  melting  away,  —  to  give  us,  may  I  hope, 
something  better,  as  much  so  as  the  buds  and 
blossoms  of  spring  are  superior  to  the  frost-work 
of  winter.  The  argument  from  design  is  that  there 
are  evidences  everywhere,  in  heaven  and  earth,  in 
plant  and  animal,  of  natural  agents  being  so  fitted 
to  each  other,  and  so  combining  to  produce  a  be- 
neficent end,  as  to  show  that  intelligence  must  have 
been    employed    in     co-ordinating    and    arranging 


2  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

them.  When  unfolded,  it  comprises  a  body  of 
facts,  and  it  involves  a  principle.  The  principle  is 
that  an  effect  implies  a  cause.  The  special  con- 
sideration and  defence  of  this  law  may  be  adjourned 
to  a  future  lecture,  when  it  will  come  up  in  more 
favorable  circumstances  to  admit  of  a  full  discus- 
sion. In  the  first  series  of  lectures  in  this  course, 
we  are  invited  to  contemplate  the  phenomena  and 
Luvs  of  the  physical  world,  so  far  as  they  bear 
marks  of  being  adapted  to  each  other  by  a  design- 
ing mind  contemplating  a  good  end. 

The  argument  is  one  which  commends  itself  to 
all  minds,  though  it  is  put  into  shape  only  by  the 
logician  and  the  expounder  of  natural  theology. 
The  child  finds  the  impression  stealing  in  upon  him, 
as  he  inspects  the  curious  objects  around  him, — 
the  fir  cone,  the  flow^er,  the  berr}^,  the  structure  of 
his  favorite  animal,  or  those  lights  kindled  nightly 
in  the  heavens,  or  as  he  is  taught  to  connect  these 
daily  gifts  with  God  the  giver.  The  peasant,  the 
savage,  feels  it,  as  he  sees  the  grass  and  trees 
springing  and  growing  and  bearing  seed,  as  he  is 
led  to  observe  the  self-preserving  instincts  of  the 
brute  creatures,  as  he  takes  a  passing  survey  of  the 
wondrous  provisions  for  maintaining  life  in  his  own 
frame,  or  finds  himself  furnished  with  food  and 
clothing  by  very  complicated  arrangements  of  Prov- 
idence. Flowing  spontaneously  into  the  minds 
of  all,  the  conviction  will  force  itself  into  the  inner- 
most heart  of  the  speculative  unbeliever.  "No 
one,"  said  David  Hume,  as  he  walked  home  one 


ARGUMENT  FROM  DESIGN.  3 

beautiful  evening  with  a  friend,  "can  look  up  to 
that  sky  without  feeling  that  it  must  have  been  put 
in  order  by  an  intelligent  being."  "But  who  made 
all  these  things  ?  "  was  the  curt  reply  of  Napoleon 
Bonaparte,  who  had  been  obliged  to  listen  to  the 
wretched  sophistries  of  a  set  of  French  atheists, 
bred  in  the  bloody  revolutionary  period,  —  "but 
who  made  all  these  things?  "  pointing  to  the  heavens. 
The  argument  is  one  and  the  same  in  all  ages. 
"  He  that  formed  the  eye,  shall  He  not  see?"  is  the 
way  in  which  the  Psalmist  expresses  it.  Socrates 
is  represented,  in  the  "Memorabilia"  of  Xenophon, 
as  pointing  to  the  traces  of  purpose  in  the  eye,  the 
ear,  and  the  teeth,  and  to  the  care  taken  of  every 
individual  man  in  the  Divine  providence.  Though 
the  argument  is  identical,  yet  it  takes  different 
forms  in  different  ages ;  one  reason  of  which  is  to 
be  found  in  the  circumstance  that  the  physical  facts 
require  to  be  differently  stated  as  science  opens  to 
us  new  views  of  the  nature  of  the  universe.  Balbus 
the  Stoic,  the  representative  of  theism  in  Cicero's 
treatise  "  De  Natura  Deorum,"  drew  a  solid  enough 
argument  from  the  order  of  the  heavenly  bodies, 
though  he  assumed  that  the  sun  moved  round  the 
earth.  Those  living  since  the  acceptance  of  the 
theory  of  Copernicus  expound  the  facts  in  a  more 
scientific  manner,  but  not  more  conclusively,  as 
bearing  on  the  relation  of  God  to  his  works.  The 
Scriptures  tell  us  that  man  cannot  number  the  stars, 
but  it  has  been  found  that  he  can  count  the  stars 
seen    by   the   naked    eye ;  but   the    science   which 


4  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

enables  him  to  do  this  has  disclosed  other  stars,  so 
that  it  is  still  true  that  the  stars  cannot  be  reckoned 
for  multitude.  It  is  much  the  same  with  the  argu- 
ment for  the  Divine  existence  :  modern  investigation 
modifies  old  views  only  to  open  new  and  grander 
ones.  The  peasant,  who  notices  a  watch  going  and 
pointing  to  the  hour,  is  as  sure  that  there  is  design 
in  it  as  the  mechanic  who  can  trace  the  relation  of 
all  the  parts,  —  the  mainspring,  the  wheels,  and 
the  hands.  And  the  same  peasant  is  as  sure  that 
there  is  purpose  in  the  hand  as  Sir  Charles  Bell 
was,  when  he  pointed  out  the  wonderful  adaptations 
of  the  various  bones  and  joints  and  muscles  and 
nerves.  A  theistic  writer  living  in  the  middle  of 
the  seventeenth  centur}^  —  say  Milton  in  writing 
"  Paradise  Lost,"  or  Charnock  in  delivering  his 
"  Discourses  on  the  Attributes,"  —  could  not  ex- 
pound the  revolutions  of  the  heavenly  bodies  in 
the  same  satisfactory  manner  as  one  living  in  the 
following  century,  when  Newton  had  established 
the  law  of  universal  gravitation ;  but  the  one  might 
have  as  reasonable  a  conviction  as  the  other  that 
"the  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God." 

It  is  a  humiliating  but  instructive  fact  that  many 
new  discoveries  in  physical  science  have,  in  the 
first  instance,  been  denounced  as  atheistic,  because 
they  were  not  conformable  to  the  opinions  which 
religious  men  had  been  led  to  entertain,  not  of  God, 
but  of  the  phenomena  of  the  world.  Even  the 
illustrious  Leibnitz  charged  the  system  of  Newton 
with  having  an  irreligious  tendency,  and  (as  I  once 


WHAT  SCIENCE  HAS   TO  DO.  5 

heard  Humboldt  denouncing,  in  an  interview  which 
I  had  with  him  a  few  months  before  his  death) 
sought  to  poison  the  mind  of  the  famous  Princess 
Sophie  of  Prussia,  against  him.  It  is  a  curious 
circumstance  that  the  law  of  gravitation  had  to  be 
defended  on  the  side  of  religion,  at  the  beginning 
of  last  century,  by  Maclaurin,  in  his  "  Account  of 
the  Discoveries  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton."  In  the  last 
age,  numbers  trained  in  a  narrow  theological  geol- 
ogy (not  found  in  Scripture,  but  drawn  out  of  it  by 
wrong  inference)  opposed  the  discoveries  as  to  the 
successive  strata  and  races  of  animated  beings  on 
the  earth's  surface,  and  could  scarcely  be  reconciled 
to  them  when  such  men  as  Buckland  and  Chalmers, 
Hitchcock  and  Hugh  Miller,  showed  that  these  facts 
widened  indefinitely  the  horizon  of  our  vision, — 
added  a  new  province  to  the  universe  of  God,  by 
disclosing  a  past  history  before  unknown,  —  and 
opened  new  and  grander  views  of  the  prescience 
and  preordination  of  God.  And,  in  our  times,  there 
are  persons  who  cannot  take  in  these  new  doctrines 
of  natural  history  and  comparative  language,  not 
because  they  run  counter  to  any  doctrine  or  precept 
of  religion,  but  because  they  conflict  with  certain 
historical  or  scientific  preconceptions  which  have 
become  bound  up  with  their  devout  beliefs. 

All  this  shows  that  religious  men  qtta  religious 
men  are  not  to  be  allowed  to  decide  for  us  the  truths 
of  science.  Conceive  an  Ecumenical  Council  at 
Rome,  or  an  Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminster, 
or  an  Episcopal  Convocation  at  Lambeth,  or  a  Con- 


6  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

gregational  Council  at  Plymouth,  or  a  Methodist 
Conference  in  Connecticut,  taking  upon  it  to  decide 
for  or  against  the  discoveries  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton, 
or  the  grand  doctrine  established  in  our  day  of  the 
Conservation  of  Force  and  Correlation  of  all  the 
Phj^sical  Forces,  on  the  ground  of  their  being  favor- 
able or  unfavorable  to  religion  !  I  have  heard  fer- 
vent preachers  denouncing  the  nebular  h3'pothesis  of 
the  heavens  and  the  theories  of  the  origin  of  organic 
species  in  a  manner  and  spirit  which  was  only  fitted 
to  damao^e  the  reli^^ion  which  thev  meant  to  recom- 
mend,  in  the  view  of  every  man  of  science  who 
heard  them  ;  and  which  drew  from  others  of  us  the 
wish  that  they  had  kept  by  what  they  were  fit  for, 
proclaiming  the  gospel  to  perishing  sinners,  and  illus- 
trating the  graces  of  the  Christian  character,  and 
left  science  to  men  of  science.  On  the  other  hand, 
our  scientific  men  are  not,  as  scientific  men,  qualified 
to  find  out  and  to  estimate  the  theological  bearings 
of  the  laws  which  they  have  discovered.  For  if 
there  be  a  religious,  there  may  also  be  an  irrelig- 
ious bias.  There  maybe  some  as  anxious  in  their 
hatred  to  expel  God  from  his  works  as  there  are 
others  resolute  in  their  love  to  bring  him  in  at  times 
or  in  ways  in  which  he  does  not  choose  to  appear. 
The  laws  of  the  physical  world  are  to  be  determined 
by  scientific  men,  proceeding  in  the  way  of  a  care- 
ful induction  of  facts  ;  and,  so  far  as  they  follow  their 
method,  I  have  the  most  implicit  faith  in  them,  and 
I  have  the  most  perfect  confidence  that  the  truth 
which   they  discover  will   not  run   counter  to   any 


PRINCIPLE  ASSUMED.  *J 

Other  truth.  But  when  they  pass  beyond  their  own 
magic  circle,  they  become  weak  as  other  men.  I 
do  not  commit  to  them  —  I  reserve  to  myself — the 
right  of  interpreting  the  religious  bearings  of  those 
laws  which  they  disclose  to  our  wondering  eyes. 

We  proceed  to  consider  the  religious  aspect  of 
some  of  the  recent  discoveries,  real  or  supposed, 
of  physical  investigation ;  which  it  is  all  the  more 
necessary  to  do,  because  there  is  a  certain  school 
studiously  seeking  to  leave  the  impression  that  the 
argument  from  design  has  been  set  aside  by  an 
advanced  science.  We  shall  show  that,  while  the 
proofs  drawn  by  such  writers  as  Paley  from  the 
wondrous  leverage  and  curiously  formed  joints  of 
the  animal  frame  are  untouched  by  recent  researches 
and  remain  as  strong  and  conclusive  as  ever,  these 
new  views  opened  of  the  history  of  the  world  dis- 
close evidence  which  could  not  have  been  discov- 
ered in  earlier  ag-es. 

I  assume  only  the  one  principle  already  an- 
nounced, that  every  eifect  is  caused.  Not  that 
ever}^  thing  has  a  cause,  — for  this  w^ould  make  us 
look  for  a  cause  of  the  uncaused,  wiiich  is  God,  — 
but  that  every  thing  which  begins  to  be  has  a  cause. 
In  employing  this  law,  I  do  not  care  for  the  present 
whether  it  be  regarded  as  a  -priori  or  a  -posteriori^ 
as  discovered  by  reason  or  by  experience.  It  is 
acknowledged  to  be  presupposed  and  involved  in 
all  scientific  research,  to  be  the  most  universal  law 
of  the  operations  of  physical  nature,  a  law  with 
no  known   exceptions.     In  our  extensive   journey 


8  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

through  the  ages  of  time  we  shall  discover  many 
things  which  begin  to  appear ;  and  we  feel  justified 
in  arguing  that  they  must  have  a  cause,  a  cause 
adequate  to  produce  them. 

In  conducting  our  argument,  it  may  be  proper  to 
premise  two  points  to  avert  misapprehension.  First, 
we  are  not  to  be  precluded  from  seeking  and  dis- 
covering a  final  cause,  because  we  have  found  an 
efficient  cause.  Using,  as  being  as  good  as  any 
other,  the  illustration  which  has  become  associated 
with  the  name  of  Paley,  —  on  seeing  a  watch,  we 
argue  that  it  has  a  final  cause,  a  purpose  to  serve,  a 
contemplated  end  :  this  we  infer  from  the  fitting  of 
pin,  wheel,  axle,  cylinder,  and  hands,  in  order  to 
intimate  the  time  to  us  who  need  "to  number  our 
days."  Yet  this  little  machine  has  been  fashioned, 
and  it  continues  to  go,  solely  by  mechanical  power. 
Tt  is  the  same  with  the  traces  of  design  we  discover 
in  nature :  they  all  spring  from  the  powers  and 
properties  of  material  agencies ;  but  the  proof  of 
purpose  is  derived  from  the  collocation  of  things, 
from  the  disposition  of  the  parts,  from  the  adapta- 
tion of  property  to  property,  from  their  being  jointed 
on  one  to  another,  from  their  being  dovetailed  into 
each  other,  from  their  combining  and  concurring 
towards  a  given  end  in  which  order  and  benev- 
olence are  manifested.  Our  inference  is,  that  these 
forces,  blind  and  unintelligent  in  themselves,  must 
be  directed  by  an  intelligence  which  sees  and  fore- 
sees. The  rays  of  light  come  from  the  sun  ninety- 
rive  millions  of  miles  away  :  they  come  in  vibrations 


EFFICIENT  AND  FINAL    CA  USE. '  9 

according  to  mechanical  laws.  The  eye  is  made 
up  of  coats,  humors,  lenses,  nerves,  all  formed 
according  to  chemical  and  physiological  laws.  The 
rays  of  light  emitted  from  the  sun  are  reflected  from 
objects  on  the  earth,  and  alighting  on  the  eye  are 
refracted  and  combined  so  as  to  form  on  the  retina 
an  image  of  the  objects  from  which  they  have  come, 
and  which  we  see  in  consequence.  The  adaptations 
necessary  to  accomplish  this  are  man}^  and  varied, 
and  some  of  them  of  a  very  delicate  and  recondite 
character.  To  mention  only  two  instances.  There 
is  the  adjustment  of  the  eyeball  to  objects  at  varying 
distances  so  as  to  allow  the  rays  of  light  to  form  the 
image  on  the  retina,  and  thus  furnish  distinct  vision. 
Helmholtz  has  shown  that  this  is  done  without  any 
will  or  effort  on  our  part.  It  is  done  by  the  ciliary 
muscle,  which  contracts  for  near  objects  and  relaxes 
for  distant  ones.  Again,  Newton  thought  that  there 
could  not  be  a  refracting  telescope  of  any  great 
power,  because  of  the  aberration  of  the  rays  of 
light  as  they  are  drawn  to  -a  focus.  Dollond,  in  a 
later  age,  ingeniously  avoided  this  difficulty  by  an 
achromatic  apparatus  in  which  the  object  glass  was 
composed  of  crown  glass  and  flint  glass,  and  the 
dispersive  power  of  the  one  was  counteracted  by 
that  of  the  other.  But  there  has  been  all  along,  if 
not  an  identical,  yet  an  analogous  provision  in  the 
eye,  so  that  in  the  healthy  organism  the  image  is 
perfect,  having  neither  penumbra  nor  prismatic 
colors.  Now  the  rays  of  light  coming  from  the 
sun  have  not  formed  the  eye,  nor  has  the  eye  formed 


lO  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

the  rays  of  light.  The  question  arises,  Whence  the 
correspondence  between  the  two?  Proceeding  on 
the  principles  on  which  science  proceeds,  it  is  as 
certain  as  any  truth  in  science  that  the  conformity 
must  have  risen  from  a  preordained  disposition  of 
the  two,  brought  about  by  a  series  of  causes  evidently 
contemplated  from  the  beginning.  "And  he  that 
formed  the  eye,  shall  he  not  see?  "  When  Napoleon 
asked  Laplace  why  God  was  not  mentioned  in  his 
"  Mechanique  Celeste,"  he  replied,  "I  have  no  need 
of  this  hypothesis."  But,  following  the  principles 
of  reason,  there  is  need  of  such  an  hypothesis  to 
account,  if  not  for  the  agencies,  yet  for  the  harmo- 
nious combination  of  agencies  in  the  fitting  of  every 
one  thing  to  every  other,  wdiich  we  see  alike  in  the 
stars  in  their  courses,  and  the  structure  and  move- 
ments of  the  eye,  and  indeed,  if  only  we  carefully 
inspect  it,  in  every  object  in  the  earth  and  in  the 
heavens. 

It  is  necessar}^  to  make  such  simple  and  obvious 
statements  as  these,  because  not  a  few  physicists  are 
themselves  laboring  under  the  impression,  and  are 
conveying  it  to  others,  that  as  soon  as  we  have  dis- 
covered the  physical  cause  of  an  occurrence  it  is 
no  longer  necessary  to  call  in  a  final  cause ;  and,  as 
Laplace  expressed  it,  final  causes  in  "the  eyes  of 
philosophers  are  nothing  more  than  the  expression 
of  the  ignorance  in  which  we  are  of  tlie  real  causes," 
and  "are  being  pushed  away  to  the  bounds  of  knowl- 
edge." But  the  correct  account  is,  that  final  cause 
may  best  be  seen  in  the  concurrence  of  physical 


IGNORANCE    OF  PO  WERS    OF  NA  TURE.       1 1 

agents  to  produce  a  given  end ;  and  the  advance  of 
knowledge,  so  far  from  driving  back  final  cause, 
only  enables  us  to  give  a  more  definite  account  of 
its  nature,  and  to  specify  the  powers  which  are  made 
to  combine,  to  eflect  the  obviously  contemplated 
result.  Darwin  has  shown  that  certain  plants  are 
fertilized  by  insects,  such  as  bees  carrying  the  pollen 
from  the  male  to  the  female ;  and  thus  he  accounts 
for  the  prevalence  of  certain  forms  and  colors  in 
flowers.  Be  it  so,  we  are  only  enabled  the  better 
to  see  in  these  insects  the  means  of  accomplishing 
a  designed  end.  There  is  a  like  error  lurking  in  a 
favorite  principle  of  Hegel  :  "That  which  they  call 
the  final  cause  of  a  thing  is  nothing  but  its  inward 
nature."  Now  it  is  doubtless  the  inward  nature  of 
a  physical  cause  to  produce  its  effect ;  but  the  pur- 
pose or  design  expressed  by  the  phrase  "final  cause '' 
is  seen  in  the  coincidence  and  co-operation  of  inde- 
pendent physical  causes,  so  as  to  secure  an  end  which 
no  one  of  them  could  accomplish  by  its  own  inward 
nature.  It  is  from  the  collocation  of  canine  teeth, 
strong  claws  and  muscles,  and  a  flesh-digesting 
stomach,  in  carnivorous  animals,  that  we  see  there 
has  been  an  end  contemplated  by  the  harmony, 
which  could  not  have  been  effected  by  the  inward 
nature  of  any  of  the  parts. 

To  correct  prevailing  misapprehension,  it  is  nec- 
essary to  announce  a  second  preliminary  point :  that 
our  argument  does  not  require  us  to  know  what  are 
the  ultimate  powers  of  nature.  These  are  certainly 
not   known    at   present,    and   they    may    never   be 


12  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

known  by  the  science  of  man.  If  they  be  many, 
there  is  need  of  mutual  accommodation  and  recip- 
rocal action,  to  suit  them  one  to  the  other,  and  make 
them  accomplish  a  good  end.  If  they  be  few,  there 
is  equal  need  of  a  nice  adjustment,  to  make  them 
fulfil  the  infinitely  varied  purposes  which  they  serve. 
If  the  number  of  elementary  bodies  in  nature  be 
sixty,  as  chemical  science  says,  provisionally,  that 
they  are  ;  and  if  the  number  of  properties  possessed 
by  them  —  mechanical,  chemical,  electric,  magnetic, 
vital  —  be  also  numerous,  there  is  surely  need  of  a 
marshalling  of  these  hosts,  to  keep  them  from  clash- 
ing, and  working  confusion  and  destruction.  Or, 
if  scientific  research  can  succeed  in  showing  that 
all  these  may  be  reduced  to  a  dozen,  or  half  a 
dozen,  an  amazing  skill  must  be  required  to  make 
them  produce  those  infinitely  diversified  bodies  and 
those  wonderfully  constructed  frames  which  we  see 
in  nature.  I  have  heard  Paganini  draw  exquisite 
music  from  one  string,  wrought  upon  in  all  sorts 
of  directions  and  with  all  kinds  of  flexures  ;  and  I 
have  listened  to  strains  produced  by  hundreds  of 
instruments,  each  with  a  complexity  of  strings  :  but 
in  the  one  case,  as  in  the  other,  combination  and 
skill  of  the  highest  order  were  required  to  create 
and  sustain  the  melody  and  the  harmony. 

Carrying  with  us  these  two  principles,  so  obvious, 
and  yet  so  frequently  overlooked,  let  us  now  take  a 
glance  at  some  of  the  recent  speculations  as  to  the 
construction  of  the  universe.  We  find  in  the  physi- 
cal world  at  least  two  ultimate  existences,  —  Matter 


CONSERVATION  OF  FORCE.  13 

and  Force.  I  believe  that  we  know  both  of  these 
by  intuition,  and  by  no  process  can  we  get  rid  of 
the  one  or  the  other.  As  to  Force,  it  will  be 
expedient  to  look  for  a  moment  at  the  grandest  sci- 
entific truth  established  in  our  day,  —  a  doctrine 
worthy  of  being  placed  alongside  that  of  universal 
gravitation, — I  mean  that  of  the  Conservation  of 
Physical  Force ;  according  to  which,  the  sum  of 
Force,  actual  and  potential,  in  the  knowable  uni- 
verse is  always  one  and  the  same  :  it  cannot  be 
increased,  and  it .  cannot  be  diminished.  It  has 
long  been  known  that  no  human,  no  terrestrial 
power  can  add  to  or  destroy  the  sum  of  Matter  in 
the  cosmos.  You  commit  a  piece  of  paper  to  the 
flames,  and  it  disappears ;  but  it  is  not  lost :  one 
part  goes  up  in  smoke,  and  another  goes  down  in 
ashes ;  and  it  is  conceivable  that  at  some  future 
time  the  two  may  unite,  and  once  more  form  paper. 
"  Why  may  not  imagination  trace  the  noble  dust  of 
Alexander,  till  we  find  it  stopping  a  bung-hole?" 
"As  thus:  Alexander  died,  Alexander  was  buried, 
Alexander  returneth  to  dust ;  the  dust  is  earth ; 
of  earth  we  make  loam :  and  why  of  that  loam, 
whereto  he  was  converted,  might  they  not  stop  a 
beer-barrel  ? 

"  Imperial  Csesar,  dead,  and  turned  to  clay, 
Might  stop  a  hole  to  keep  the  wind  away : 
O,  that  the  earth,  which  kept  the  world  in  awe, 
Should  patch  a  wall  t'  expel  the  winter's  flaw!  " 

As  man  cannot  create  or  annihilate  matter,  so  he 
cannot  create  or   annihilate  force.      This  doctrine 


14  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

has  been  scientifically  established  in  our  day  by 
men  like  Mayer,  Joule,  Henry,  and  others.  We 
now  regard  it  as  one  and  the  same  force,  but  under 
a  vast  variet}^  of  modifications,  which  warms  our 
houses  and  our  bodily  frames,  which  raises  the 
steam  and  impels  the  engine,  which  effects  the  dif- 
ferent chemical  combinations,  which  flashes  in  the 
lightning  and  lives  in  the  plant.*  Man  may  direct 
the  force,  and  make  it  go  this  way  or  that  way  ;  but 
he  can  do  so  only  by  means  of  force  under  a  differ- 
ent form,  —  by  force  brought  into  his  frame  by  his 
food,  obtained  directly,  or  indirectly  through  the 
animal,  from  the  plant,  which  has  drawn  it  from 
the  sun  ;  and  as  he  uses  or  abuses  it,  he  cannot 
lessen  or  augment  it.  I  move  my  hand  ;  and,  in 
doing  so,  I  move  the  air,  which  raises  insensibly 
the  temperature  of  the  room,  and  may  lead  to 
chemical  changes,  and  excite  electric  and  magnetic 
currents,  and  take  the  circuit  of  the  universe  with- 
out being  lost  or  lessened.  Now  the  bearing  of  this 
doctrine  on  religion  seems  to  be  twofold.  First,  it 
furnishes  a  more  striking  manifestation  than  anything 
known  before  of  the  One  God,  with  his  infinitely 
varied  perfections,  —  of  his  power,  his  knowledge, 
his  wisdom,  his  love,  his  mercy;  and  we  should  see 
that  one  Power  blowing  in  the  breeze,  smiling  in 
the  sunshine,  sparkling  in  the  stars,  quickening  us 

*  I  was  prepared,  from  its  first  announcement,  to  receive  this 
truth  ;  for  it  follows  directly  from  a  doctrine  laid  down  bj  me 
twentj-one  years  ago,  in  my  work  on  "  The  Method  of  the  Divine 
Government"  (Bookii.),  that  all  bodies  possess  fixed  properties, 
which  cannot  be  increased  nor  lessened. 


CORRELATION  OF  THE  FORCES.  1 5 

as  we  bound  along  in  the  felt  enjoyment  of  health, 
efflorescing  in  every  form  and  hue  of  beauty,  and 
showering    down   daily  gifts   upon  us.      The   pro- 
foundest  minds  in  our  day,  and  in  every  day,  have 
been  fond  of  regarding  this  force,  not  as  something 
independent  of  God,  but  as  the  very  power  of  God 
acting  in  all  action;  so  that  "in  him  we  live,  and 
move,    and    have    our   being."      But,   secondly,   it 
shows  us  that  in  God's  works,  as  in  God  himself, 
there  is  a  diversity  with  the  unity  ;    so  that  force 
manifests  itself  now  in   gravity,  now  in  molecular 
attraction   and    motion,    now   in  chemical   affinities 
among  bodies,  now  in  magnetic   and   diamagnetic 
properties,  now  in  vital  assimilation.     And  we  see 
that  all  these  forces  are  correlated  :  so  that  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Correlation  of  all  the  varied  Physical 
Forces  stands  alongside  of  the  Conservation  of  the 
one  Physical  Force  ;  and  by  the  action  of  the  whole, 
and  of  every  part  made  to  combine  and  harmonize, 
there  arise  beauteous  forms  and  harmonious  colors  ; 
the  geometry  of  crystals  ;  the  types  of  the  plant  and 
of  every  organ  of  the  plant,  the  branches,  the  roots, 
the  leaves,  the  petals,  the  pistils,  the  stamens  ;   and 
the  types  of  the  animal,  so  that  every  creature  is 
fashioned   after  its  kind,  and  every  limb   takes  its 
predetermined   form,  while  there   is   an   adaptation 
of  every  one  part  to  every  other,  of  joint  to  column, 
and  joint  to  joint,  of  limb  to  limb,  and  of  limb  to 
body,  of  the  ear  to  the  vibrating  medium,  and  the 
nostrils  to  odors,  and  the  eye  to  the  varied  undula- 
tions of  light. 


1 6  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

So  much  for  Force,  witli  its  Correlations.  But 
with  the  Forces  we  have  the  Matter  of  the  universe, 
in  which,  I  beHeve,  the  Forces  reside.  It  is  main- 
tained that  the  worlds  have  been  formed  out  of  Star 
Dust.  Now,  I  have  to  remark  as  to  this  star  dust, 
first  of  all,  that  it  is  at  best  an  hypothesis.  No 
human  eye,  unassisted,  has  ever  seen  it,  as  it  gazed, 
on  the  clearest  night,  into  the  depths  of  space.  It 
is  doubtful  whether  the  telescope  has  ever  alighted 
upon  it,  in  its  widest  sweeps.  Lord  Rosse's  tele- 
scope, in  its  first  look  into  the  heavens,  resolved 
what  had  before  been  reckoned  as  star  dust  into 
distinctly  formed  stars.  But  I  am  inclined  to  admit 
the  existence  of  star  dust  as  an  hypothesis.  I 
believe  it  explains  phenomena  which  require  to  be 
explained,  and  which  cannot  otherwise  be  accounted 
for.  I  allow^  it  freely,  that  there  is  evidence  that 
the  planets  and  moons  and  sun  must  have  been 
fashioned  out  of  some  such  substance,  at  first  incan- 
descent, and  then  gradually  cooling.  But,  then, 
it  behoves  us  to  look  a  little  more  narrowly  into 
the  nature  of  this  star  dust.  Was  it  ever  a  mass 
of  unformed  matter,  without  individuality,  without 
properties?  Did  it  contain  within  itself  these  sixty 
elementary  substances,  with  their  capacities,  their 
affinities,  their  attractions,  their  repulsions?  When 
a  meteor  comes,  as  a  stranger,  within  our  terrestrial 
sphere,  either  out  of  this  original  star  dust  or  out 
of  planets  which  have  been  reduced  to  the  state 
of  original  star  dust,  it  is  found  to  have  the  same 
components  as  bodies  on  our  earth,  and  these  with 


STAR  DUST.  17 

the  same  properties  and  affinities.  The  spectro- 
scope, which  promises  to  reveal  more  wonders  than 
the  telescope  or  microscope,  shows  the  same  ele- 
ments —  such  as  hydrogen  and  sodium  —  in  the 
sun  and  stars  as  in  the  bodies  on  the  earth's  surface. 
The  star  dust,  then,  has  already  in  it  these  sixty 
elementary  bodies,  with  all  their  endowments, 
—  gravitating,  mechanical,  chemical,  magnetic. 
Whence  these  elements?  Whence  their  correla- 
tions, their  attractions,  their  affinities,  their  fittings 
into  each  other,  their  joint  action?  It  is  by  no 
means  the  strongest  point  in  my  cumulative  argu- 
ment; but  it  does  look  as  if,  even  at  this  stage, 
there  had  been  a  harmonizing  power  at  work,  and 
displaying  foresight  and  intelligence. 

As  to  this  material,  we  must  hold  one  or  other  of 
two  opinions.  One  is,  that  it  had  from  the  begin- 
ning all  the  capacities  which  afterwards  appear  in 
the  worlds  formed  out  of  it.  It  has  not  only  the 
mechanical,  but  the  chemical,  the  electric  powers 
of  dead  matter ;  the  vital  properties  of  plants  and 
animals,  such  as  assimilation,  absorption,  contrac- 
tility ;  and  the  attributes  of  the  conscious  mind,  as 
of  perception  by  the  senses,  of  memory,  imagina- 
tion, comparison,  of  the  appreciation  of  beauty,  of 
sorrow,  of  joy,  of  hope,  of  fear,  of  reason,  of  con- 
science, of  will.  These  capabilities  may  not  yet  be 
developed  :  but  they  are  there  in  a  latent,  a  dormant 
state  in  the  incandescent  matter;  and  are  ready,  on 
the  necessary  conditions  being  supplied,  to  rise  to 
the  instincts  of  animals, — to  the  love  of  a  mother 


l8  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

for  her  offspring,  —  to  the  sagacity  of  the  dog,  the 
horse,  or  the  elephant,  — to  the  genius  of  a  Moses, 
a  Homer,  a  Socrates,  a  Plato,  an  Aristotle,  a  Paul, 
a  John,  a  Shakespeare,  a  Milton,  a  Newton,  a 
Leibnitz,  or  an  Edwards.  Were  all  this  capacity 
in  the  star  dust,  I  would  be  constrained  to  seek  for 
a  cause  of  it  in  a  Power  possessed  of  knowledge, 
wisdom,  and  beneficence,  planting  seeds  in  that 
soil  to  come  forth  in  due  season.  But  there  is 
another  supposition  :  that  these  qualities  were  not  in 
the  original  matter,  but  were  added  from  age  to 
age,  —  it  may  be,  according  to  law;  and  if  so,  they 
rnust  have  come  from  a  Power  out  of  and  beyond 
the  star  dust,  from  a  Power  possessed  of  reason  and 
affection.  I  know  not  that  science  can  determine 
absolutely  which  of  these  alternatives  it  should  take. 
But  take  either;  and,  on  the  principle  of  effect 
implying  cause,  the  mind  must  rise  to  the  contem- 
plation of  a  Being  w^ho  must  himself  be  possessed 
of  intelligence,  in  order  to  impart  intelligence. 
,  This  star  dust  has  a  greater  heaviness  or  thick- 
ness of  parts  in  certain  places  than  at  others  :  and, 
by  the  attraction  of  its  particles,  masses  of  it  begin 
to  rotate,  and  one  planet  is  set  off  after  another; 
and  the  planets  cast  oft' satellites,  or  rings;  and  the 
sun  settles  in  the  centre,  with  bodies  circulating 
round  him.'  All  this  has  taken  place  according  to 
natural  law^ :  but  we  infer  that  there  has  been  a 
guardian  Intelligence  guiding  and  watching  the 
process ;  otherwise,  the  heavy  parts  causing  the 
rotation  might  have  been  in  the  wrong  places  in 


PROTOPLASM. 


19 


reference  to  each  other,  and  the  circling  bodies  at 
the  wrong  distances  ;  and,  as  the  result,  a  scene  of 
never-ceasing  confusion,  in  which  the  elements  and 
powers  would  have  been  warring  with  each  other, 
and  rendering  it  impossible  that  there  should  ap- 
pear any  of  the  higher  products  of  life,  intelligence, 
and  love. 

The  earth  is  now  formed,  an  oblate  spheroid, 
spinning  round  its  owm  axis,  and  round  the  sun. 
By  the  action  and  counteraction  of  the  inner  heat 
and  outer  cold,  there  comes  to  be  a  solid  land,  with 
a  corrugated  surface  of  hill  and  dale,  ocean  and 
atmosphere.  There  follow  rocks,  deposited  by 
w^ater  or  thrown  out  b}^  fire ;  and,  as  these  are 
found  to  come  forth,  by  aqueous  or  igneous  process, 
in  a  state  of  order  and  adaptation,  and  are  made  to 
serve  a  beneficent  end  towards  the  living  creatures, 
we  argue  that  they  are  constructed  on  a  plan. 

But  as  yet  there  has  been  no  life,  vegetable  or 
animal.  But  the  protoplasm  now"  appears.  We 
shall  let  Professor  Huxley  describe  that  now  famous 
substance,  which  he  has  taken  under  his  special 
protection,  and  by  which  he  works  such  wonders. 
It  is  the  material  out  of  which  all  living  forms  are 
made,  as  pottery  is  from  the  clay;  it  is  the  elemen- 
tary life-stuft'  of  all  plants  and  all  animals.  You 
may  see  it  as  w^ell  as  anywhere  else  in  the  hairs  to 
which  the  nettle  owes  its  stinging  power.  "The 
whole  hair  consists  of  a  very  delicate  outer  case  of 
wood,  closely  applied  to  the  inner  surface  of  which  is 
a  layer  of  semi-fluid  matter  full  of  innumerable  gran- 


20  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

ules  of  extreme  minuteness.  This  semi-fluid  lining 
is  protoplasm,  which  thus  constitutes  a  kind  of  bag 
full  of  limpid  liquid."  The  protoplasmic  layer  of 
the  nettle  hair  is  seen  to  be  in  a  condition  of  unceas- 
ing activity.  Local  contractions  of  the  whole  thick- 
ness of  its  substance  pass  slowly  and  gradually  from 
point  to  point,  and  give  rise  to  the  appearance  of 
progressive  waves,  just  as  the  bending  of  the  suc- 
cessive stalks  of  corn  by  a  breeze  produces  the 
apparent  billows  of  a  cornfield.  In  addition  to  these 
movements,  and  independently  of  them,  the  gran- 
ules are  driven  in  relatively  rapid  streams,  and  there 
is  a  general  stream  up  one  side  and  down  another. 
This  protoplasm,  according  to  Professor  Huxley,*  is 
"the  formal  basis  of  all  life.  It  is  the  clay  of  the 
potter;  which,  bake  and  paint  it  as  he  will,  remains 
clay,  separated  by  artifice,  and  not  by  nature,  from 
the  commonest  brick  or  sun-dried  clod.  Thus  it 
becomes  clear  that  living  powers  are  cognate,  and 
that  all  living  forms  are  fundamentally  of  one  char- 
acter." He  says  that  "  all  vital  action  is  the  result 
of  the  molecular  forces  of  the  protoplasm  which 
displays  it.  And  if  so,  it  must  be  true,  in  the  same 
sense  and  to  the  same  extent,  that  the  thoughts  to 
which  I  am  now  giving  utterance,  and  your  thoughts 
regarding  them,  are  the  expression  of  molecular 
changes  in  that  matter  of  life  which  is  the  source 
of  our  other  vital  phenomena." 

Now,  upon  this  account  of  protoplasm  I  have  to 
remark  that  the  great  body  of  naturalists  do  not 

*  Physical  Basis  of  Life. 


PROTOPLASM.  21 

allow  that  it  is  correct.  One  of  the  most  erudite 
men  of  our  day,  Dr.  Stirling.*  in  a  paper  read  be- 
fore the  Royal  College  of  Physicians  of  Edinburgh, 
has  shown  that  the  researches  of  the  eminent  Ger- 
man physiologists  are  against  him.  They  do  not 
admit  that  one  and  the  same  protoplasm  is  the  mat- 
ter of  all  organisms.  It  is  certain  that  all  proto- 
plasm is  not  chemically  identical.  The  protoplasm 
differs  in  different  tissues,  is  different  in  the  bone 
from  what  it  is  in  the  muscle,  and  different  in  the 
nerves  and  brain  from  what  it  is  in  any  other  part 
of  the  frame.  Again,  it  is  affirmed  that  the  proto- 
plasm differs  in  different  plants  and  animals,  each 
of  which  has  its  own  kind,  which  is  not  interchange- 
able with  that  of  the  rest. 

But  we  may  let  Mr.  Huxley's  account  of  it  pass. 
From  his  description  of  it,  it  is  evident  that  this 
elementary  life-stuff  is  a  very  complex  body,  with 
very  peculiar  endowments,  —  quite  as  likely  to  work 
evil  as  to  work  good,  and  requiring  to  be  directed 
in  order  to  operate  beneficently.  It  is  composed 
chemically  of  carbon,  hydrogen,  oxygen,  and  nitro- 
gen;  in  one  word,  of  protein.  But  then  protein  is 
not  protoplasm  :  no  power  known  to  us  can  turn 
protein  into  protoplasm.  Science,  at  its  present  ad- 
vanced stage,  cannot  change  dead  matter  into  living 
matter.  No  chemist  can  do  it  in  his  laboratory. 
The  most  prying  inquiry,  by  microscope  or  other- 
wise, into  the  laboratory  of  nature,  has  not  detected 
her  producing  living   matter  in  the  form  of  proto- 

*  As  Regards  Protoplasm. 


22  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

plasm,  or  any  other,  except  by  matter  already  living. 
No  known  plant  can  live  upon  the  uncompounded 
elements  of  protoplasm.  "A  plant,"  says  Mr.  Hux- 
le}^  himself,  "  supplied  with  pure  carbon,  hydrogen, 
oxygen,  and  nitrogen,  phosphorus,  sulphur,  and 
the  like,  would  as  infallibly  die  as  the  animal  in 
his  bath  of  smelling-  salts,  though  it  would  be  sur- 
rounded by  all  the  constituents  of  protoplasm." 

Professor  Huxley,  indeed,  tells  us  that  ''when 
carbon,  hydrogen,  oxygen,  and  nitrogen  are  brought 
together  under  certain  conditions,  they  give  rise  to 
the  still  more  complex  body,  protoplasm  ;  and  this 
protoplasm  exhibits  the  phenomena  of  life."  Under 
certain  conditions :  we  must  not  let  these  words  slip 
in  so  quietly,  as  Mr.  Huxley  would  have  it.  These 
conditions,  be  they  what  they  may,  constitute  the 
difference  between  dead  protein  and  living  proto- 
plasm. And  here  I  may  remark  that  Mr.  Mill  has 
been  showing  (I  think  successfully,  and  I  have 
been  aiding  him  in  my  own  way)  that  what  are 
usually  called  conditions  are  truly  parts  of  the  cause, 
which  is  the  sum  of  the  conditions, — the  cause,  as 
I  have  labored  to  prove,  being  dual,  plural,  com- 
plex, always  impl3dng  more  than  one  agent;  and 
it  is  only  when  all  are  present  that  the  effect  is 
produced.  We  say  the  organ  produces  music  on 
the  condition  of  one  playing  on  it ;  but  surely  the 
man  playing  is  as  essential  a  part  of  the  cause  as 
the  organ  itself.*     By  no  skill  can  the  chemist  turn 

*  "  It  is  very  common  to  single  out  one  only  of  the  antece- 
dents  under   the   denomination   of   Cause,   calling   the    others 


CONDITIONS   PARTS    OF   CAUSES.  23 

protein  into  protoplasm.  Professor  Huxley  thinks 
it  can  be  done  on  conditions  to  him  unknown.  When 
he  knows  what  the  conditions  are,  and  makes  tliem 
known  to  me,  I  am  sure  I  will  be  able  to  discover 
adaptation  and  design  in  them.  Herbert  Spencer 
tells  us  that  chemists  have  shown  that  many  sup- 

merelj  Conditions."  "The  real  cause  is  the  whole  of  these  ante- 
cedents ;  and  we  have,  philosophically  speaking,  no  right  to  give 
the  name  of  cause  to  one  of  them,  exclusive  of  the  others."  — 
MilVs  Logic,  B.  iii.  c  v.  §  3.  I  have  shown  that  in  material  nature 
there  is  always  need  of  the  action  of  two  or  more  agents,  in 
order  to  an  effect.  —  Afethod of  Divtiie  Gov>r)'?nne?it,  B.  ii.  c.  i.  §  i. 
An  Exami7iatioii  of  Mr.  J.  S.  Mills  Philosophy,  c.  xiii.  :  "If  a 
ball  moves  in  consequence  of  another  striking  it,  there  is  need  of 
the  one  ball  as  well  as  the  other;  and  the  cause,  properly  speak- 
ing, consists  of  the  two  in  a  relation  to  each  other.  But  not  only 
is  there  a  duality  or  plurality  in  the  cause  :  there  is  the  same 
(Mr.  Mill  has  not  noticed  it)  in  the  effect.  The  effect  consists  not 
merely  of  the  one  ball,  the  ball  struck  and  set  in  motion,  but 
also  of  the  other  ball  which  struck  it,  and  which  has  now  lost 
part  of  its  momentum.  By  can-ying  out  this  doctrine,  we  can 
determine  what  is  meant  by  '  condition'  and  '  occasion,'  when  the 
phrases  are  applied  to  the  operation  of  causation.  When  we 
speak  of  an  agent  requiring  a  '  condition,'  an  '  occasion,'  or  'cir- 
cumstances,' in  order  to  its  action,  we  refer  to  the  other  agent 
or  agents  required,  that  it  may  produce  a  particular  effect.  Thus, 
that  fire  may  burn,  it  is  necessary  to  have  fuel  or  a  combustible 
material.  In  order  that  my  will  may  move  my  arm,  it  is  needful 
to  have  the  concurrence  of  a  healthy  motor  nerve.  So  much 
for  the  dual  or  plural  agency  in  the  cause.  But  there  is  a  similar 
complexity  in  the  effect,"  &c.  To  apply  this  general  principle  to 
the  case  before  us  :  protein,  it  is  said,  may  become  protoplasm 
under  certain  conditions.  These  conditions,  whatever  they  be. 
constitute  the  difference  between  the  two ;  and  Mr.  H.  has  thrown 
no  light  on  the  production  of  protoplasm,  till  he  has  shown  us 
what  are  these  conditions,  which  ought  to  be  represented  as 
forming  an  essential  part  of  the  cause. 


24 


NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 


posed  organic  substances  are  inorganic.  Be  it  so, 
that  men  may  have  made  a  mistake  in  the  past 
which  they  are  seeking  to  rectify  in  the  present. 
And  then,  in  the  usual  dogmatic  way  of  a  man  who 
may  see  clearly  much  truth,  but  does  not  see  other 
truths  by  which  it  is  modified,  he  assures  us  that  no 
chemist  doubts  but  he  will  be  able  to  turn  inor- 
ganic into  organic  matter.  All  I  have  to  say  on 
this  is,  that  when  the  chemist  has  done  it,  and 
shown  the  way  by  which  he  has  done  it,  I  am  con- 
fident I  will  be  able  to  point  out  a  curious  adaptation 
in  these  conditions  previously  unknown,  but  now 
known,  by  which  he  has  accomplished  the  feat.  If 
the  things  composing  the  conditions  were  in  the  star 
dust,  they  were  there  as  seeds  ready  to  burst  forth 
in  due  time.  If  they  have  come  from  without,  they 
have  come  in  so  appropriately  as  to  show  that  they 
have  come  of  purpose,  —  whether  by  natural  law  or 
not,  we  may  not  be  able  to  tell  till  the  man  of 
science  has  made  them  known  to  us. 

And  then  "protoplasm,"  says  Stirling,  "can  only 
be  produced  by  protoplasm,  and  each  of  all  the 
innumerable  varieties  of  protoplasm  only  by  its  own 
kind.  For  the  protoplasm  of  the  worm  we  must  go 
to  the  worm,  and  for  that  of  the  toadstool  to  the 
toadstool.  In  fact,  if  all  living  beings  came  from 
protoplasm,  it  is  quite  as  certain  that  but  for  living 
beings  protoplasm  would  disappear."  Where  then 
did  we  get  the  first  protoplasm  and  the  various  kinds 
of  protoplasm,  is  still  the  question. 

And  then  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  naturalists 


NEED    OF  SEED    OR  EGG.  25 

do  not  admit  that  protoplasm  is  all  that  is  necessary 
to  produce  the  living  organism.  It  has  long  been 
known  that  organized  matter,  vegetable  and  animal, 
is  made  up  of  cells.  "All  the  great  German  his- 
tologists  still  hold  by  the  cell,  and  can  hardly  open 
their  mouths  without  mention  of  it."  "  They  speak 
still  of  cells  as  self-complete  organisms  that  move 
and  grow,  that  nourish  and  reproduce  themselves, 
and  that  perform  specific  functions.  Omnis  cellula 
e  cellula  is  the  rubric  they  work  under  as  much  now 
as  ever."  Not  only  so,  but  it  seems  that  "brain 
cells  only  generate  brain  cells,  and  bone  cells  bone 
cells."  If  a  cell  can  only  be  produced  from  a  cell, 
the  question  when  and  whence  and  how  do  we  get 
the  first  cell  is  still  pressed  upon  us,  and  requires  us 
to  call  in  a  new  set  of  conditions,  which  I  hold  must 
imply  a  fitting  and  a  purpose. 

Nor  is  this  all.  Not  only  do  all  cells  proceed  from 
cells ;  but  all  organisms,  all  plants  and  animals, 
proceed  from  a  seed  or  Qgg.  It  is  still  true  as  ever, 
omne  vivuni  ab  ovo.  Not  even  protoplasm  can  give 
us  an  organized  being,  even  the  lowest,  without  a 
germ.  An  attempt  was  made  a  few  years  ago  by 
M.  Pouchet  to  get  organized  beings,  not  from  unor- 
ganized, which  he  did  not  try,  but  from  stagnant 
water  containing  organized  matter  without  germs. 
But  M.  Pasteur,  the  distinguished  naturalist  of 
Paris,  came  after  him  and  showed  that  there  must 
have  been  germs  in  the  water  which  was  emplo3^ed. 
He  showed  first  that,  if  you  allowed  him  to  destroy 
all  germs  in  the  matter  experimented  on  by  expos- 

2 


l6  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

ing  it  to  a  sufficiently  high  temperature,  no  living 
creatures  would  appear.  He  showed  farther  —  by 
experiments  conducted  in  low,  marshy  places,  then 
on  the  Jura  range,  and  finally  on  the  high  Alps  — 
that  living  beings  did  or  did  not  appear  just  accord- 
ing as  there  were  seeds  in  the  organized  matter ; 
that  is,  that  they  came  forth  in  greatest  numbers  in 
the  low,  marshy  places,  in  smaller  numbers  in  the 
higher  region  of  Jura,  and  that  very  few  appeared 
in  the  cold  region  of  the  Upper  Alps.  And  in  re- 
gard to  the  general  question,  he  has  demonstrated 
that  when  air  is  passed  through  cotton  wool,  which, 
acting  as  a  strainer,  arrests  the  germs,  no  life  can 
be  made  to  appear.  And  to  prove  that  this  was  not 
effected  by  any  occult  change  produced  in  the  air 
by  cotton  wool,  he  did  tlie  same  by  a  bent  tube, 
which  allows  free  passage  to  the  air,  but  does  not 
allow  the  germs  to  pass,  as  in  doing  so  they  would 
have  to  mount  upward.  These  experiments  were 
reckoned  as  decisive  at  the  time,  and  are  referred 
to  by  the  great  body  of  naturalists  in  Great  Britain 
and  on  the  Continent  as  decisive  still.  Mr.  Huxley 
refers  to  them  in  his  recent  address  to  the  British 
Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science,  and 
says  :  "  They  appear  to  me  now,  as  they  did  seven 
years  ago,  to  be  models  of  accurate  experimentation 
and  logical  reasoning."  It  is  thus  shown  that  not 
only  is  there  no  proof  of  such  a  thing  as  spontaneous 
generation,  —  that  is,  the  production  of  organized 
out  of  unorganized  matter,  —  but  that  there  cannot 
be  organisms  formed  out  of  organic  matter  till  a  seed 


SPONTANEOUS    GENERATION.  27 

has  been  deposited.  The  question  again  comes  up, 
Where,  when,  and  whence  did  we  get  the  first  seed 
or  hving  creature  producing  seed  after  its  kind? 
When  they  show  us  this,  I  engage,  if  they  do  it 
while  I  am  alive,  to  point  out  some  nice  adapta- 
tions in  the  production  of  this  before  unknown 
phenomenon. 

I  am  aware  that  Dr.  Bastian  has,  within  the  last 
year,  laid  before  the  Royal  Society  of  London  a 
set  of  experiments,  which  seem  to  yield  a  different 
result,  and  to  prove  that  living  beings  may  and  do 
arise,  as  he  expresses  it,  de  novo,*  Hitherto  it  has 
been  believed  that  100°  Centigrade  would  destroy  all 
organic  germs.  But  he  says  he  "  has  found  organ- 
isms in  organic  fluids,  either  acid  or  alkaline,  which, 
whilst  enclosed  within  hermetically  sealed  and  air- 
less flasks,  had  been  submitted  not  only  to  such  a 
temperature,  but  even  to  one  varying  146°  C.  and 
153°  C.  for  four  hours."  I  find  that  Professor  Huxley 
has  no  faith  in  the  accuracy  of  these  experiments. 
"  I  believe  that  the  organisms  w4iich  he  has  got  out 
of  his  tubes  are  exactly  those  which  he  has  put  into 
them.  I  believe  that  he  has  used  impure  materials, 
and  that  what  he  imagines  to  have  been  the  gradual 
development  of  life  and  organization  in  his  solutions 
is  the  very  simple  result  of  the  settling  together  of 
the  solid  impurities,  which  he  was  not  sufficiently 
careful  to  see,  in  their  scattered  condition,  when  the 
solutions  were  made."  But  supposing  these  experi- 
ments to  have  been  performed  with  unimpeachable 

*  See  Nature,  July,  1870. 


28  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

accuracy,  what  has  he  estabhshed  by  them?  Not 
that  animated  beings  can  be  produced  without  seeds, 
but  merely  that  certain  seeds  can  bear  exposure  to  a 
higher  temperature  than  they  have  hitherto  been  sup- 
posed to  be  capable  of  standing.  Professor  Huxley 
says  that  "  even  if  the  results  of  the  experiments  are 
trustworthy,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  there  has 
been  life  without  a  germ.  The  resistance  of  living 
matter  to  heat  is  known  to  vary  within  considerable 
limits,  and  to  depend  to  some  extent  upon  the  chem- 
ical and  physical  qualities  of  the  surrounding  me- 
dium. But  if,  in  the  present  state  of  science,  the 
alternative  is  offered  us,  either  germs  can  stand  a 
greater  heat  than  has  been  supposed,  or  the  mole- 
cules of  dead  matter,  for  no  valid  or  intelligible 
reason  that  is  assio-ned,  are  liable  to  rearrano^e  them- 
selves  into  living  bodies,  exactly  such  as  can  be 
demonstrated  to  be  frequently  produced  in  another 
way,  I  cannot  understand  how  choice  can  be,  even 
for  a  moment,  doubtful."  He  sums  up:  "The  evi- 
dence direct  and  indirect  in  favor  of  Biogenesis 
[that  all  life  comes  from  life]  must,  I  think,  be 
admitted  to  be  of  great  weight."  After  making  this 
statement  so  frankly,  he  thinks  he  may  indulge  in  a 
speculation  for  which  he  admits  he  has  no  proof, 
and  the  reasoning  involved  in  which  is  as  illogical 
as  Dr.  Bastian's  experiments  are  unscientific :  "  I 
think  it  would  be  the  height  of  presumption  for  any 
man  to  sa}^  that  the  conditions,  under  which  matter 
assumes  the  properties  we  call  'vital,'  may  not  some 
day  be  artificially  brought  together.     All  that  I  feel 


PLANTS.  29 

justified  in  affirming  is,  that  I  see  no  reason  for 
believing  that  the  feat  has  been  performed  yet." 
But  then,  "If  it  were  given  me  to  look  beyond  the 
abyss  of  geologically  recorded  time  to  the  still  more 
remote  period  when  the  earth  was  passing  through 
physical  and  chemical  conditions,  which  it  can  no 
more  see  again  than  a  man  may  recall  his  infancy, 
I  should  expect  to  be  a  witness  of  the  evolution 
of  living  protoplasm  from  not  living  matter,"  he 
adds,  "under  forms  of  great  simplicity."  I  suspect 
that  he  has  an  idea  that  his  favorite  protoplasm  may 
be  there,  and  gendering  hfe  there.  "But  I  beg  you 
to  recollect  that  I  have  no  right  to  call  my  opinion 
any  thing  but  an  act  of  philosophic  faith."  May  it 
not  be  true  of  this  faith,  what  Mr.  Huxley  would 
allow  to  be  true  of  some  religious  faiths,  that  the 
wish  is  father  to  the  thought,  and  that  we  are  in- 
clined to  believe  what  we  wish  to  be  true  ?  It  may 
be  that  in  some  way,  at  present  inexplicable,  lower 
life  did  then  appear ;  but  over  against  this  faith  I 
set  the  one  which  I  cherish,  on  the  ground  of  the 
whole  analogy  of  nature,  that  if  that  way  could  be 
explicated  we  should  certainly  find  there,  as  we  find 
everywhere,  traces  of  a  purpose.  But  I  stand  on 
firmer  ground  when  I  maintain  that,  when  known 
facts  are  against  us,  it  is  utterly  unscientific  to  appeal 
to  what  is  and  must  ever  be  unknown. 

We  have  now  protoplasm  as  the  food,  and  cells  to 
feed  upon  them,  and  a  germ  cell :  but  we  have  not, 
after  all,  the  organized  plant  or  animal ;  we  have  not 
the  rose,  or  the  lily,  or  the  oak;  we  have  not  even 


30  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

the  lichen  or  the  zoophyte.  We  have  merely  the 
stone  and  mortar  necessary  to  the  erection  of  the 
structure.  In  addition,  there  must  needs  be  some 
music,  like  that  which  brought  together  the  stones 
of  ancient  Thebes,  to  co-ordinate  the  materials  of 
which  the  universe  is  composed  ;  or,  as  more  reason- 
able, there  must  be  a  builder,  who  is  also  an  archi- 
tect, so  to  arrange  them  that  they  may  be  turned 
into  the  form  of  the  pine,  the  oak,  the  eagle,  or  the 
lion,  or  that  goodly  house  in  which  we  dwell,  and 
which  is  "so  fearfully  and  wonderfully  made." 

Let  us  suppose  that,  by  constant  accretion  of 
powers,  w^e  have  now  the  plant :  the  question  is 
started.  How  has  this  risen  to  the  animal?  "Not- 
withstanding," says  Professor  Huxley,  "  all  the 
fundamental  resemblances  which  exist  between  the 
powers  of  the  protoplasm  in  plants  and  animals, 
they  present  a  striking  difference  in  the  fact  that 
plants  can  manufacture  fresh  protoplasm  out  of 
mineral  compounds,  whereas  animals  are  obliged 
to  procure  it  ready  made,  and  hence  in  the  long 
run  depend  on  plants.  Upon  what  conditions  [that 
convenient  word  comes  in  once  more]  this  difference 
in  the  powers  of  the  two  great  divisions  of  the  w^orld 
of  life  depends,  nothing  is  at  present  known." 
Whether  he  knows  it  or  not,  there  must  be  some 
cause,  or,  if  he  prefers,  "condition,"  of  the  plant 
being  turned  into  the  animal. 

And  animals  —  except,  it  may  be,  a  few  transi- 
tional forms  at  the  base  of  the  scale  —  have  Sensa- 
tion.    Whence  this  sensation,  so  different  from  the 


SENSATION.  31 

properties  of  matter,  —  this  sensation  not  found  in 
unorganized  matter,  not  even  in  the  plant,  and  not 
manifested  till  the  animal  appears?  Was  it  in  the 
original  matter,  —  in  the  incandescent  matter  out 
of  which  our  earth  was  formed?  One  trembles  at 
the  very  thought ;  as,  in  such  scorching  heat,  the 
animal  must  have  been  in  a  state  of  excruciating 
and  intolerable  anguish,  —  we  can  conceive,  seek- 
ing extinction,  and  incapable  of  finding  it.  And  if 
the  sensation  came  in  at  a  later  date,  I  ask.  Whence? 
There  is  surely  no  power  in  nature  capable  of  gen- 
erating sensation  out  of  particles  of  matter  not  them- 
selves capable  of  sensation? 

Since  the  immediately  preceding  thoughts  were 
written,  I  find  Professor  Tyndall  following  some- 
what the  same  train,  in  a  paper  read  at  the  late 
meeting  of  the  British  Association,  but  avoiding  the 
legitimate  conclusion  in  a  very  illegitimate  way. 
"  The  gist  of  our  present  inquiry  regarding  the 
introduction  of  life  is  this  :  Does  it  belong  to  what 
we  call  matter?  or  is  it  an  independent  principle 
inserted  into  matter  at  some  suitable  epoch,  —  say, 
when  the  physical  conditions  became  such  as  to 
permit  of  the  development  of  life  ?  "  "  There  are 
the  strongest  grounds  for  believing  that,  during  a 
certain  period  of  its  history,  the  earth  was  not,  nor 
was  it  fit  to  be,  the  theatre  of  life.  Whether  this 
was  ever  a  nebulous  period,  or  merely  a  molten 
period,  does  not  much  matter ;  and  if  we  resort  to 
the  nebulous  condition,  it  is  because  the  probabilities 
are  really  on  its  side.       Our  question  is  this  :  Did 


32  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

creative  energy  pause  until  the  nebulous  matter  had 
condensed?  until  the  earth  had  been  detached? 
until  the  solar  fire  had  so  far  withdrawn  from  the 
earth's  vicinit}^  as  to  permit  a  crust  to  gather  round 
the  planet?  Did  it  wait  until  the  air  was  isolated? 
until  the  seas  were  formed?  until  evaporation,  con- 
densation, and  the  descent  of  rain  had  begun?  until 
the  sun's  rays  had  become  so  tempered  by  distance 
and  by  waste  as  to  be  chemically  fit  for  the  decom- 
positions necessary  to  vegetable  life?  Having 
waited  through  those  aeons  until  the  proper  condi- 
tions had  set  in,  did  it  send  the  fiat  forth,  ^  Let  life 
be'?  These  questions  define  a  hypothesis,  not 
without  its  difficulties,  but  the  dignity  of  which  was 
demonstrated  by  the  nobleness  of  the  men  whom  it 
sustained.  However  the  convictions  of  individuals 
here  and  there  may  be  influenced,  the  process  must 
be  slow  which  commends  the  hypothesis  of  natural 
evolution  to  the  public  mind.  For  what  are  the 
core  and  essence  of  this  hypothesis?  Strip  it  naked, 
and  you  stand  face  to  face  with  the  notion  that  not 
alone  the  more  ignoble  forms  of  animalcular  or 
animal  life,  not  alone  the  nobler  forms  of  the 
horse  and  lion,  not  alone  the  exquisite  and  wonder- 
ful mechanism  of  the  human  body,  but  that  the 
human  mind  itself — emotion,  intellect,  will,  and  all 
these  phenomena  —  were  once  latent  in  a  fiery  cloud. 
Surely  the  mere  statement  of  such  a  notion  is  more 
than  a  refutation."  "  I  do  not  think  that  any  holder 
of  the  evolution  hypothesis  would  say  that  I  over- 
state or  overstrain  it  in  any  way.     I  merely  strip  it 


WAS  LIFE  IN   THE   STAR  DUST.  ^iZ 

of  all  vagueness,  and  bring  it  before  you,  unclothed 
and  unvarnished,  the  notions  by  which  it  must 
stand  or  fall.  Surely  these  notions  represent  an 
absurdity  too  monstrous  to  be  entertained  by  any 
sane  mind."  The  difficulty  in  the  way  of  carrying 
out  the  hypothesis,  that  all  things  —  mind  and  body 
and  all  their  properties  —  are  derived  by  develop- 
ment from  star  dust  is  powerfully  put,  and  should 
lay  an  arrest  on  those  who  speak  so  dogmatically 
of  the  possibility  of  accounting  for  all  things  by 
namral  law.  After  having  made  this  strong  and 
apparently  satisfactory  statement,  he  tries  to  lessen 
the  effect  of  it,  by  hinting  that  the  difficulties  may 
be  lessened,  if  not  removed,  by  falling  back  upon  a 
philosophic  law,  — that  of  Relativity,  which  has 
been  adopted  by  the  school  to  which  he  belongs ; 
and  by  hinting  that  the  perplexities  may  arise  from 
erroneous  traditional  views  about  mind  and  matter.* 
It  will    be    necessary   thoroughly   to  examine  that 

*  "  Why  are  these  notions  absurd?  and  why  should  sanity 
reject  them?  The  law  of  relativity,  Avhich  plays  so  important  a 
part  in  modern  philosophy,  may  find  its  application  here.  These 
evolution  notions  are  absurd,  monstrous,  and  fit  only  for  the 
intellectual  gibbet,  in  relation  to  the  ideas  concerning  matter 
which  were  drilled  into  us  when  young.  Spirit  and  matter  have 
ever  been  presented  to  us  in  the  rudest  contrast;  the  one  as  all 
noble,  the  other  as  all  vile.  But  is  this  correct?"  Speaking  of 
certain  supposed  enlightened  minds,  with  which  he  evidently 
concurs:  "They  have  as  little  fellowship  with  the  atheist  who 
says  there  is  no  God,  as  with  the  theist  who  professes  to  know 
the  mind  of  God."  This  language  points  to  some  seemingly 
vei-y  profound  truth,  which  it  will  be  necessary  to  examine, 
when  it  will  be  found  to  look  so  large  because  of  the  mist  in 
which  we  see  it. 

2* 


34 


NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 


general  doctrine,  and  the  application  of  it  to  mind 
and  body,  which  are  alleged  to  be  one  and  the 
same;  so  that,  in  certain  conditions,  mind  might 
come  out  of  matter.  This  will  be  undertaken  in 
the  second  series  of  these  Lectures.  But,  before 
doing  this,  we  must  take  up  this  whole  subject  of 
Development,  and  the  Origin  of  Species,  and  the 
Law  of  Natural  Selection,  in  their  relation  to  the 
lower  animals,  to  man,  and  to  human  history.  I 
am  satisfied  if  in  this  Lecture  I  have  succeeded  in 
showing  that  the  argument  from  design  is  not 
undermined  by  modern  discoveries ;  and  that, 
through  the  process  by  which  the  universe  has 
reached  its  present  condition,  there  runs  an  evi- 
dence of  pre-arrangement,  skill,  and  purpose,  — 
quite  as  much  so  as  in  the  formation  of  threads  into 
a  web  in  the  loom  ;  as  in  the  types  taking  their 
proper  places  so  as  to  print  a  volume  ;  as  in  the 
dispositions  of  the  soldiers  in  the  campaigns  of  Han- 
nibal, of  Washington,  or  of  Moltke. 


IL 


Natural    Selection.  —  Origin    of    Man.  —  Historical 
Development.  —  Christ  and  the  Moral  Power. 

TN  these  Lectures,  I  am  considering  the  argument 
from  design  in  its  appHcation  to  the  subjects  dis- 
cussed in  modern  science.  In  the  last  lecture,  I  have 
shown  that  we  have  numerous  examples  of  adapta- 
tion and  purpose  in  the  production  of  plants  and 
animals.  We  have  seen  that  no  known  natural 
power  can  produce  organized  out  of  unorganized 
matter,  can  produce  protoplasm  out  of  protein,  can 
generate  a  cell  without  a  parent  cell,  or  a  plant  or 
an  animal  without  a  seed  or  germ,  or  a  sentient 
animal  from  insentient  matter.  But  the  question 
has  often  occurred  to  me.  Is  religion  essentially 
bound  up  with  the  settlement,  one  way  or  other,  of 
these  scientific  questions? 

Suppose  it  proven  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as 
spontaneous  generation  :  would  religion  thereby  be 
overthrown,  either  in  its  evidences,  its  doctrines, 
or  its  precepts?  I  have  doubts  if  it  would.  The 
great  body  of  thinkers  in  ancient  times  —  even  those 
most  inclined  to  theism  —  seem  to  have  believed 
that  lower  creatures  sprang  out  of  the  dust  of  the 


36  NATURAL    rilEOLOGl'. 

earth,  without  the  need  of  a  previous  germ.  Some 
of  the  profoundest  theologians  and  ablest  defend- 
ers of  religion  in  the  early  church  were  believers 
in  the  doctrine  of  spontaneous  generation,  — which 
may  be  consistently  held  in  modern  times  by  believers 
in  natural  and  revealed  religion.  The  establishment 
of  the  need  of  a  germ,  in  order  to  the  production  of 
life,  does  not  carry  us  back  three  centuries.  There 
is  really  no  ground  for  the  fears  of  the  timid,  on  the 
one  hand,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  for  the  arrogant 
expectation  of  the  atheist,  that  he  will  thereby  be 
able  to  drive  God  from  his  works.  Spontaneous 
generation  is  not  to  be  understood  as  a  generation 
out  of  nothing,  an  event  without  a  cause,  an  affair 
of  caprice  or  chance.  It  is  a  production  out  of  pre- 
existing materials  by  means  of  powers  in  the  mate- 
rials,—  powers  very  much  unknown,  working  only 
in  certain  circumstances,  and  requiring,  in  order  to 
their  operation,  favorable  conditions,  assorted  (so  all 
religious  people  think)  by  Divine  wisdom.  Spon- 
taneous generation,  supposing  it  to  exist,  cannot  be 
a  simple,  it  must  be  a  ver}^  complex  process ;  in- 
volving properties  possessed  by  matter,  and  a  con- 
course of  circumstances  working  to  the  production 
of  an  intended  end. 

Plants  and  animals  (let  me  suppose)  are  now 
formed  out  of  germs,  or,  if  you  can  show  it  to  be 
so,  out  of  wisely  endowed  and  carefully,  prepared 
matter.  But,  How  are  the}^  propagated?  is  the  next 
question.  By  special  acts  of  creation?  or  by  devel- 
opment?    I  do  not  know  that  religion,  natural  or 


DE  VEL  OPMEN  T.  37 

revealed,  has  any  interest  in  holding  by  any  partic- 
ular view  on  this  subject,  any  more  than  it  has  in 
maintaining  any  special  theory  as  to  the  formation 
of  strata  of  stone  on  the  earth's  surface.  It  is  now 
admitted  that  Christians  may  hold,  in  perfect  con- 
sistency with  religion  and  Genesis,  that  certain 
layers  of  rock  were  formed,  not  at  once  by  a  fiat 
of  God,  but  mediately  by  water  and  fire  as  the 
agents  of  God.  And  are  they  not  at  liberty  to  hold, 
always  if  evidence  be  produced,  that  higher  plants 
have  been  developed  from  lower,  and  higher  brutes 
from  lower,  according  to  certain  laws  of  descent, 
known  or  unknown,  working  in  favorable  circum- 
stances? There  is  nothing  irreligious  in  the  idea 
of  development,  properly  understood.  We  have 
constant  experience  of  development,  —  of  the  de- 
velopment of  individual  plants  and  animals  from 
parent  plants  and  animals.  And  why,  if  proof  be 
produced,  should  we  not  be  allowed  to  believe  in 
the  development  of  a  new  species  from  the  crossing 
of  two  species  in  favorable  circumstances? 

Development,  if  we  only  carefully  inquire  into  its 
nature,  will  not  be  seen  to  be  so  simple  an  opera- 
tion as  some  imagine.  The  development  of  an  in- 
dividual plant  or  animal  from  its  parentage  is  a  very 
complex  process,  implying  an  immense  body  of 
agencies,  mechanical,  chemical,  probably  electric 
and  magnetic :  some  would  say  that  it  requires,  in 
addition,  an  independent  vital  power.  But,  put  the 
supposition  that  no  distinct  vital  power  is  required, 
—  that  a  certain  coincidence  of  chemical  and  me- 


38  NATURAL    THEOLOG2'. 

chanical  and  electric  agencies  will  accomplish  the 
whole,  — the  question  would  only  be  started,  Whence 
this  combination  and  co-agency  of  these  diverse 
forces  to  accomplish  a  specific  end?  What  is  true 
of  the  development  of  individuals  would  also  hold 
good  of  the  development  of  species,  if  there  be  such 
a  thing  in  nature.  If  man  could  construct,  out  of 
simple  mechanical  powers,  not  only  a  watch  telling 
the  hour,  but  a  watch  which  should  produce  other 
watches  telling  the  hour  through  all  time,  our  ad- 
miration of  the  skill  of  the  artist  would  not  be 
diminished.  In  such  an  instrument,  were  it  possible 
or  conceivable,  the  maker  would  require  to  secure 
a  double  end,  —  not  onh^  that  the  watch  would  an- 
nounce the  time,  but  that  there  should  be  a  second 
watch  and  a  third  watch,  on  indefinitely,  all  accom- 
plishing the  same  purpose.  Our  wonder  would  be 
increased,  if  the  watches  thus  produced  not  only 
produced  other  watches,  but,  as  they  consorted 
in  favorable  circumstances,  better  and  yet  better 
watches.  So,  in  vegetable  and  animal  develop- 
ment, there  must  be  adaptation  upon  adaptation  : 
adaptation  of  the  individual  to  its  mate  ;  adaptation 
in  the  growth  of  the  young  when  yet  connected 
with  the  parent ;  adaptation  of  the  birth  to  external 
circumstances  in  the  air,  food,  and  clothing  supplied 
for  it;  adaptation  in  the  instincts  of  animals,  —  for 
example,  in  the  love  of  offspring,  and  in  the  capacity 
of  the  creature  to  grow  and  strengthen,  and,  it  may 
be,  to  produce  a  progeny  better  than  itself. 

The  question  as  to  whether  there  is  or  is  not  a 


VITAL  PRINCIPLE. 


39 


separate  vital  principle,  and  whether  there  may  not 
be  a  new  species  developed  out  of  the  old,  is  a 
question  for  science  to  settle.  And,  whichever  way 
it  is  settled,  there  is  room  for  irreligion  —  I  am  sorry 
to  say  ;  but  there  is  room  also  for  religion.  The 
assertion  that  there  is  a  vital  principle,  capable  of 
originating,  unfolding,  and  perfecting  all  that  is  in 
the  organism,  may  be  quite  as  irreligious  as  the 
denial  of  a  separate  vital  potency.  Proceeding  on 
the  existence  of  a  vital  force,  which  they  suppose, 
pantheistically  or  atheistically,  to  inhere  in  nature, 
there  are  some  who  imagine  that  they  have  thereby 
explained  every  thing  connected  with  the  develop- 
ment and  growth  of  vegetable  and  animal  organ- 
isms. Mr.  Huxley  can  work  such  wonders  by 
protoplasm,  only  by  imparting  to  it  a  life-power 
such  as  is  ascribed  to  nature  generally  by  pan- 
theists. I  am  inclined,  on  the  evidence  of  science, 
to  believe  in  a  vital  power,  as  different  from  the 
chemical  as  the  chemical  is  from  the  mechanical ; 
but  I  do  not  believe  in  an  independent  power  called 
the  vegetable  or  animal  life,  capable  of  producing 
all  the  beautiful  forms  and  adaptations  which  we 
admire  in  the  living  creatures.  It  can  be  shown, 
whether  we  do  or  do  not  call  in  a  vital  principle, 
that  there  is  need  of  a  whole  series  of  nice  arrange- 
ments of  part  and  power  before  the  organism  can 
fulfil  its  functions,  and  yield  seed  after  its  kind  or 
better  than  its  kind.  It  is  a  question  to  be  decided 
by  naturalists,  and  not  by  theologians ;  who,  so 
far  as  I  see,  have  no  authority  from  the  Word  of 


40  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

God  to  say  that  every  species  of  tiny  moths  has 
been  created  independent  of  all  species  of  moths 
which  have  gone  before.  The  natural  tendency  of 
theologians  will  be  conservative.  I  go  a  step  farther, 
and  say  that  it  ought  to  be  conservative.  It  is  not  for 
them  to  run  eagerly  after  every  new  theory  which 
may  be  propounded,  and  live  its  ephemeral  day ; 
and  to  make  religion  to  lean  upon  it,  only  to  suffer 
a  fall  and  a  humiliation  when  it  breaks  down. 
"  He  that  believeth  will  not  make  haste."  Religion 
can  afford  to  wait  till  the  point  is  established  or  dis- 
established. When  a  law  has  been  established  so 
as  to  stand  the  tests  of  scientific  induction,  then 
theologians  may  reverently  use  it,  in  expounding 
the  traces  of  design  discoverable  in  the  universe. 
It  is  for  naturalists  to  determine  the  points  which 
have  been  started  by  Mr.  Darwin.  The  law  with 
w^iich  his  name  is  identified  is  that  of  Natural 
Selection.  He  has  copiously  illustrated  that  law, 
but  has  not  defined  it  very  clearly.  The  name. 
Natural  Selection,  might  lead  us  to  imagine  that, 
somehow  or  other,  the  plant  or  animal  has  a  choice 
in  the  matter,  or  at  least  some  power  to  improve 
itself  or  its  position.  A  plant  is  liable  to  be  eaten 
by  cattle,  and  might  be  the  better  of  spines  :  and 
as  it  needs  them,  so  the  need  provides  them,  and 
they  go  down  to  posterity.  An  animal  w^ould  be 
profited  by  claws  to  seize  its  prey ;  and  the  wish 
calls  forth  rudimentary  claws,  which  go  down  with 
improvements  from  generation  to  generation.  But 
no  such  idea  is  meant  to  be  conve^^ed  by  Darwin. 


NATURAL   SELECTION.  4 1 

The  law  is  simply,  that,  where  a  plant  happens  to 
get  a  thorn,  or  a  beast  a  claw,  it  is  more  likely  to 
live  while   others   perish,   and  that  it  transmits  its 
endowment   to   posterity.       It   means   that,   in   the 
struggle  for  existence,  the   stronger,  or  the  better 
adapted  to  its  position,  will  prevail.     Even  this  pre- 
supposes that  there  are  capacities  in  nature,  —  the 
capacity  of  producing  spines  and  claws  in  certain 
circumstances.     But  there  is  more  than  this  implied  : 
it  is  imphed  that  strength,  or  any  useful  peculiarity, 
once  acquired,  will  become  hereditary.     This  last 
is  a  very  complex  law,  or  rather  process,  the  pre- 
cise elements   of  which  have    not   been    unfolded. 
Mr.  Darwin  says  that  science  has  hitherto  thrown 
no  light  on  the  nature  of  heredity.      "The  laws 
governing  inheritance  are  quite  unknown :   no  one 
can  say  why  the  same  peculiarity  in  different  indi- 
viduals of  the  same  species,  and  in  individuals  of 
different  species,  is  sometimes  inherited  and  some- 
times not  so ;  why  it  often  reverts,  in  certain  char- 
acters, to  its  grandfather  or  grandmother,  or  other 
much  more  remote  ancestor ;  why  a  peculiarity  is 
often  transmitted  from  one  sex  to  both  sexes,  or  to 
one  sex  alone,  more  commonly,  but  not  exclusively, 
to  the  like  sex."  *     Depend  upon  it,  when  the  pro- 
cess  is  explored,  there  will   be  found  an  immense 
number  and  variety  of  adaptations  to  secure  that  the 
peculiarity  of  the  individual,  found  to  be  useful,  will 
not  perish  with  the  individual,  but  go  down  to  future 
ages. 

*  Origin  of  Species,  chap.  i. 


42  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

As  long  as  such  men  as  Agassiz  in  this  country, 
and  Milne  Edwards  and  his  school  in  France, 
oppose  the  theory  of  Darwin,  not  only  by  their 
authority,  but  by  their  facts  and  arguments,  Dar- 
winism cannot  be  regarded  as  settled.  Sir  William 
Thomson,  in  a  set  of  papers  in  the  "  North  British 
Review"  and  elsew^here,  —  papers  of  which  I  do 
not  say  that  they  will  never  be  answered,  but  of 
which  I  affirm  that  they  have  not  hitherto  been 
answered,  —  shows  that  the  derivation  of  all  ani- 
mated beings  from  one  original  germ  cannot  be 
reconciled  with  astronomy  ;  which  declares  that  the 
earth  was  formed  at  a  comparatively  late  date, 
whereas  the  formation  of  all  living  creatures  by 
natural  selection  requires  indefinite  ages.  My 
opinion  on  such  a  subject  is  of  no  scientific  value  ; 
but  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  theory  contains  a 
large  body  of  important  truths,  which  we  see  illus- 
trated in  every  department  of  organic  nature  ;  but 
that  it  does  not  contain  the  whole  truth,  and  that  it 
overlooks  more  than  it  perceives.  Whence  this 
power  which  raises  the  plant,  which  raises  the  ani- 
mal, from  age  to  age?  Whence,  for  example,  the 
sensation  in  animals,  their  liability  to  pleasure  and 
pain?  Whence  the  instincts  of  animals?  —  of  the 
spider,  the  bee,  the  horse,  the  dog,  the  elephant? 
Natural  selection  might  modify  them,  supposing 
them  to  exist;  but  the  question  is.  How  came  they 
to  exist?  Were  they,  at  least  as  germs,  in  the  origi- 
nal star  dust?  Or  have  they  been  added?  Or,  if 
added,  by  natural  law?  or  how?     To  these  questions 


GENESIS  AND    GEOLOGY.  43 

science  can  give  no  answer,  and  should  not  pretend  to 
be  able  to  give  an  answer.  When  it  talks,  with  such 
seeming  profundity  and  wisdom,  of  "conditions,"  let 
it  not  imagine  that  it  is  giving  an  explanation,  when 
the  conditions  are  unknown, —  the  conditions,  for 
example,  of  the  production  of  the  affection  of  the 
mother  bird  or  beast  for  its  offspring.  But,  on  this 
subject,  religion  can  say  as  little,  except  that  it 
should  trace  all  things  up  to  God ;  not  being  able, 
however,  to  determine  whether  he  has  been  acting 
by  an  immediate  fiat,  or,  as  he  usually  does,  by 
secondary  causes. 

On  one  point,  however,  religion  has  a  title  to 
speak  out.  I  do  not  know  that  she  has  any  special 
charge  given  her  of  the  lower  animals,  except  to 
see  that  they  are  protected  and  kindly  treated.  But 
religion  is  addressed  to  man,  and  she  has  to  see 
that  man's  nature  is  not  degraded  and  reduced  to 
the  same  level  as  that  of  the  brutes.  There  has 
been  a  special  revelation  made  as  to  the  origin 
and  destiny  of  man ;  and  this  we  must  uphold  and 
defend. 

There  is,  account  for  it  as  we  may,  a  general 
correspondence  between  the  record  in  the  Bible  and 
the  record  in  stone.  My  friend  Hugh  Miller  ma}^ 
not  have  been  able  to  point  out  an  identity  in  every 
minute  particular ;  but  he  has  certainly  established 
a  general  congruity.  There  is  an  order  and  there  is 
a  progression  very  much  the  same  in  both.  In  both 
there  is  light  before  the  sun  appears.  In  Genesis, 
the  fiat  goes  forth,  "Let  there  be  light,  and  there 


44  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

was  light"  the  first  day,  and  the  sun  comes  forth 
only  the  fourth,  —  in  accordance  with  science,  which 
tells  us  that  the  earth  was  thrown  off  ages  before 
the  sun  had  become  condensed  into  the  centre  of 
the  planetary  system.  In  both,  the  inanimate  comes 
before  the  animate ;  in  both,  the  grass  and  herb 
and  tree,  before  the  animal ;  in  both,  fishes  and 
fowls,  before  creeping  things  and  cattle.  In  both, 
we  have,  as  the  last  of  the  train,  man  standing  up- 
right, and  facing  the  sky ;  made  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  and  yet  filled  with  the  inspiration  of  God. 

As  both  agree  in  the  history  of  the  past,  so  both 
agree  as  to  the  future  of  the  world.  The  Scrip- 
tures point,  not  obscurely,  to  a  day  of  dissolution. 
2  Pet.  iii.  5  :  "  This  they  wilHngly  are  ignorant  of, 
that  by  the  word  of  God  the  heavens  were  of  old,  and 
the  earth  standing  out  of  the  water  and  in  the  water  : 
whereby  the  world  that  then  was,  being  overflowed 
with  water,  perished.  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are  kept  in  store, 
reserved  unto  fire  against  the  day  of  judgment." 
All  men  of  science  are  agreed  that,  according  to 
the  laws  now  in  operation,  there  is  in  our  system  a 
wasting  of  energy  in  the  shape  of  heat,  which  must, 
in  an  indefinite  time,  bring  our  cosmos  to  a  state  of 
chillness  and  death  ;  to  be  followed,  some  think,  by 
an  accumulation  of  heat  and  a  conflagration,  which 
will  reduce  all  things  to  star  dust;  out  of  which,  by 
the  agglomeration  of  matter,  new  worlds  will  arise. 
It  may  be  rash  in  any  one  to  imagine  that  he  sees 
so  far  into  the  future,  in  which  new  powers  may 


ORIGIN  OF  MAN. 


45 


appear,  as  they  have  certainly  done  in  the  past; 
but  this,  it  can  be  demonstrated,  is  and  must  be  the 
issue,  according  to  the  powers  now  working.  Such 
is  the  correspondence  between  science  and  Scrip- 
ture. You  will  find  no  such  correspondence  be- 
tween modern  discovery  and  any  work  of  heathen 
mythology,  eastern  or  western.  Prima  facie  ^  there 
must  be  a  great  truth  in  that  opening  chapter  of 
Genesis,  which  has  anticipated  geology  by  three 
thousand  years. 

Mr.  Darwin  has  not  given  to  the  world  his  views 
as  to  the  origin  of  man.*  Mr.  Wallace,  who,  con- 
temporaneously with  Darwin,  discovered  the  law 
of  Natural  Selection  (the  publication  of  a  paper  by 
him  called  forth  Darwin's  book),  has  declared,  in  a 
work  recently  published,!  that  there  are  insuperable 
difficulties  in  applying  that  law  to  the  derivation  of 
the  human  race.  He  declares  boldly,  "I  do  not 
consider  that  all  nature  can  be  explained  on  the 
principles  of  which  I  am  so  ardent  an  advocate ;  " 
and  he  discovers  evidence  of  an  "unknown  higher 
law,  beyond  and  independent  of  all  those  laws  of 
which  we  have  any  knowledge."  He  conducts  an 
argument  to  show  "  the  insufficiency  of  Natural 
Selection  to  account  for  the  development  of  man." 
There  are  gaps  between  the  brute  and  man  which 

*  This  was  true  when  this  Lecture  was  delivered.  When  it  is 
going  through  the  press,  "  The  Descent  of  Man,"  Vol.  I.,  has 
appeared  in  America.  If  Vol.  II.  appears  before  this  volume  is 
issued,  I  may  notice  the  whole  work  in  the  Appendix. 

t  Wallace  on  Natural  Selection.     X. 


46  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

cannot  be  filled  up.  "  The  brain  of  the  lowest 
savages,  and,  as  far  as  we  yet  know,  of  the  pre- 
historic races,  is  little  inferior  in  size  to  that  of  the 
highest  types  of  man,  and  immensely  superior  to 
that  of  the  higher  animals."  "  The  collections  of  Dr. 
J.  B.  Davis  and  Dr.  Morton  give  the  following  as  the 
average  internal  capacity  of  the  cranium  in  the  chief 
races  :  Teutonic  family,  ninety-four  cubic  inches  ; 
Esquimaux,  ninety-one  cubic  inches;  Negroes, 
eighty-live  cubic  inches ;  Australians  and  Tas- 
manians,  eighty-two  cubic  inches ;  Bushmen, 
seventy-seven  cubic  inches.  These  last  numbers, 
however,  are  deduced  from  comparatively  few 
specimens,  and  may  be  below  the  average  ;  just  as 
a  small  number  of  Finns  and  Cossacks  give  ninety- 
eight  cubic  inches,  or  considerably  more  than  that  of 
the  German  races.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the 
absolute  bulk  of  the  brain  is  not  necessarily  much 
less  in  savage  than  in  civilized  man  ;  for  Esquimaux 
skulls  are  known  with  a  capacity  of  one  hundred 
and  thirteen  inches,  or  hardly  less  than  the  largest 
among  Europeans.  But,  what  is  still  more  extra- 
ordinary, the  few  remains  yet  known  of  prehistoric 
man  do  not  indicate  any  material  diminution  in  the 
size  of  the  brain  case.  A  Swiss  skull  of  the  stone 
age,  found  in  the  lake  dwelling  of  Meilen,  corre- 
sponded exactly  to  that  of  a  Swiss  youth  of  the 
present  day.  The  celebrated  Neanderthal  skull 
had  a  larcrer  circumference  than  the  averao^e  ;  and 
its  capacity,  indicating  actual  mass  of  brain,  is 
estimated  to  have  been  not  less  than  seventy-five 


ORIGIN   OF  MAN.  47 

cubic  inches,  or  nearly  the  average  of  existing 
Australian  crania.  The  Engis  skull,  perhaps  the 
oldest  known,  and  which,  according  to  Sir  John 
Lubbock,  '  there  seems  no  doubt  was  really  con- 
temporary with  the  mammoth  and  the  cave  bear,' 
is  yet,  according  to  Professor  Huxley,  'a  fair 
average  skull,  which  might  have  belonged  to  a 
philosopher,  or  might  have  contained  the  thought- 
less brains  of  a  savage.'"  Let  us  turn  now  to  the 
brain  of  animals.  ''The  adult  male  orang-utan  is 
quite  as  bulky  as  a  small-sized  man,  while  the  gorilla 
is  considerably  above  the  average  size  of  man,  as 
estimated  by  bulk  and  weight :  yet  the  former  has  a 
brain  of  only  twenty-eight  cubic  inches  ;  the  latter, 
one  of  thirty,  or,  in  the  largest  specimen  yet  known, 
of  thirty-four  and  a  half  cubic  inches.  We  have 
seen  that  the  average  cranial  capacity  of  the  lowest 
savages  is  probably  not  less  than  five-sixths  of  that 
of  the  highest  civilized  races,  while  the  brain  of  the 
anthropoid  apes  scarcely  amounts  to  one-third  of 
that  of  man,  in  both  cases  taking  the  average;  or 
the  proportions  may  be  more  clearly  represented  by 
the  following  figures  :  anthropoid  apes,  ten  ;  savages, 
twenty-six;  civilized  man,  thirty-two."  There  is  no 
evidence,  then,  of  a  gradual  rise,  by  natural  law, 
from  the  brute  to  the  lowest  form  of  man.  Mr. 
Wallace  emphatically  urges  that  savages  have  a 
brain  capacity  not  required  by  their  wants,  and 
which  could  not  have  been  produced  by  their  wants 
in  the  struggle  of  life. 

He  dwells  on  some  other  capacities,  which  he  says 


48  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

cannot  be  accounted  for  by  the  theory.  "  The  soft, 
naked,  sensitive  skin  of  man,  entirely  free  from  that 
hairy  covering  which  is  so  universal  among  other 
mammalia,  cannot  be  explained  on  the  theory  of 
natural  selection.  The  habits  of  savages  show  that 
they  feel  the  want  of  this  covering,  which  is  most 
completely  absent  in  man  exactly  where  it  is  thick- 
est on  other  animals.  We  have  no  reason  whatever 
to  believe  that  it  could  have  been  hurtful,  or  even 
useless,  to  primitive  man;  and,  under  these  circum- 
stances, its  complete  abolition,  shown  by  its  never 
reverting  in  mixed  breeds,  is  a  demonstration  of  the 
agency  of  some  other  power  than  the  law  of  the 
survival  of  the  fittest,  in  the  development  of  man 
from  the  lower  animals.  Other  characters  show 
difficulties  of  a  similar  kind,  though  not  perhaps  in 
an  equal  degree.  The  structure  of  the  human  foot 
and  hand  seem  unnecessarily  perfect  for  the  needs 
of  savage  man,  in  whom  they  are  as  completely  and 
as  humanly  developed  as  in  the  highest  races.  The 
structure  of  the  human  larynx,  giving  the  power  of 
speech  and  of  producing  musical  sounds,  and  espe- 
cially its  extreme  development  in  the  female  sex, 
are  shown  to  be  beyond  the  needs  of  savages,  and 
from  their  known  habits  impossible  to  have  been 
acquired  either  by  sexual  selection  or  by  survival 
of  the  fittest."  These  are  difficulties  which  present 
themselves  to  Mr.  Wallace  as  a  naturalist.  He  sees 
also  those  which  arise  from  his  possession  of  men- 
tal faculties  which  have  no  relation  to  his  fellow- 
men  or  to  his  material  progress,  to  his  possession  of 


ORIGIN  OF  MAN.  49 

consciousness,  his  power  of  conceiving  eternity  and 
infinity,  and  the  sense  of  right  and  wrong  which 
he  finds  in  unciviHzed  tribes.  After  quoting  Mr. 
Huxley,  who  says  that  "  our  thoughts  are  the  expres- 
sion of  molecular  changes  in  that  matter  of  life 
which  is  the  source  of  our  other  vital  phenomena," 
Mr.  Wallace  remarks  that  he  has  not  been  able  to 
find  the  clew  by  which  Mr.  Huxley  "  passes  from 
those  vital  phenomena  which  consist  only,  in  their 
last  analysis,  of  movements  of  particles  of  matter, 
to  those  other  phenomena  which  we  term  thought, 
sensation,  or  consciousness." 

Science,  it  is  acknowledged,  can  produce  no  direct 
evidence  of  man  being  derived  from  the  brute.  The 
argument  against  the  doctrine  must  be  drawn  mainly 
from  his  possession  of  qualities  not  found  in  the 
lower  animals.  As,  most  obvious  of  all,  we  have 
organs  of  speech,  and,  as  more  important,  the  power 
of  using  them  intelligently.*  We  have  the  faculty 
of  reaching  abstract  and  general  truth,  a  faculty 
which  the  brute  creatures  do  not  possess;  when 
they  seem  to  have  it,  it  arises,  as  can  be  shown, 
merely  from  the  association  of  ideas.  Then  there 
is  the  capacity  of  distinguishing  between  good  and 
evil,  and  that  of  free  will  to  choose  the  good  and 

*  "  Although  it  has  been  at  various  times  stated  that  certain 
savage  tribes  are  entirely  without  language,  none  of  these 
accounts  appear  to  be  well  authenticated,  and  they  are  a  priori 
extremely  improbable.  At  any  rate,  even  the  lowest  races  of 
which  we  have  any  satisfactory  account  possess  a  language, 
imperfect  though  it  may  be,  and  eked  out  to  a  great  extent  by 
signs."  —  Lubbock,  Origin  of  Civilization  ;  VIII. 

3 


50  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

avoid  the  evil.  Crowning  them  all,  is  man's  power 
to  rise  to  a  knowledge  of  God,  to  the  contem- 
plation of  his  perfections,  and  to  acts  of  w^orship. 
These  higher  attributes  of  humanity  will  fall  under 
our  consideration,  when  we  come  to  look  at  the 
mind.  Science  can  say  nothing  as  to  how  all  these 
qualities  came  to  be  superinduced.  Were  they  in 
the  star  dust  when  it  was  incandescent?  or  did  they 
appear  when  it  began  to  cool?  If  so,  in  what  state? 
If  not  so,  w^hen  and  where  and  how  did  they  come 
in?  Science,  physiological  or  paleontological,  can 
throw  no  light  on  this  subject,  and  should  not  decide 
or  dogmatize  when  it  has  no  data  to  proceed  on. 
The  Book  of  Genesis,  which  has  so  anticipated 
geology  in  the  account  wiiich  it  has  given  of  the 
successive  appearance  of  plants  and  animals,  has 
here  gone  beyond  science,  and  given  an  account 
against  which  science  has  and  can  have  nothing  to 
advance. 

That  account  is  brief,  simple,  general,  avoiding 
minute  and  circumstantial  details:  Gen.  ii.  7,  "And 
the  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground, 
and  breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life  ; "  a 
statement  implying  hrst  the  connection  of  man  with 
the  earth,  — wdth  its  dust,  its  flesh,  or  animal  nature, 
—  and  at  the  same  time  connecting  him  with  heaven 
by  an  inspiration,  or  breath  of  the  Almighty.  Such 
is  the  very  summary  account  of  the  physical  crea- 
tion, of  the  formation  of  the  dust,  the  flesh,  the 
bodily  frame.  Does  it  say  how  it  was  done,  by 
natural  or   supernatural   law,  by  means  or  without 


TRACES    OF  PROGRESSION.  51 

means?  Scripture  enlarges  and  dwells  only  on  the 
higher  endowment,  the  truly  human,  as  distinguished 
from  the  animal  endowment;  as  Gen.  i.  26,  "And 
God  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image,  after  our 
likeness  :  and  let  him  have  dominion  over  th>*i  fish 
of  the  sea,  and  over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over 
the  cattle,  and  over  all  the  earth,  and  over  every 
creeping  thing  that  creepeth  upon  the  earth.  So 
God  created  man  in  his  own  image,  in  the  image  of 
God  created  he  him."  All  this  is  in  accordance  with 
clearly  established  fact.  Man  has  affinities  with  the 
lower  animals :  this  should  not  be  denied.  Like 
them  he  is  formed  out  of  dust  and  returns  to  dust. 
But  at  the  same  time  he  has  qualities  which  assimi- 
late him  to  God,  —  a  power  of  looking  back  into  the 
past  and  anticipating  the  future,  of  tracing  effects  to 
causes  and  anticipating  effects  from  causes,  of  appre- 
ciating the  fair  and  the  good,  and  a  free  choice  to 
act  on  his  conviction.  And  is  there  not  need  of 
Divine  breath  to  produce  all  this,  to  make  this  dust 
a  living  soul  ?  Is  there  not  need  of  a  Divine  decree 
to  make  his  soul  like  unto  God  in  knowledge,  right- 
eousness, and  true  holiness?  In  doing  all  this,  God 
is  onl}'  carrying  out  and  completing  the  plan  shad- 
owed forth  in  the  geological  ages.  These  two  lect- 
m-es  are  only  an  exposition  of  what  the  Apostle  says  : 
I  Cor.  XV.  46,  "  Howbeit,  that  was  not  first  which 
is  spiritual  (Trysi'^uwr/xoy) ,  but  that  which  is  natural 
{\i)vi['Aov^  ;  and  afterward  that  which  is  spiritual." 

And   so  there   appear  farther   evidences  of   pro- 
gression,  and  of  a  progressive  progression.     The 


52  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

powers  of  nature  are  made  by  a  power  above  them, 
to  bring  forth  higher  products  characterized  by  wis- 
dom, by  skill,  and  by  taste.  Your  believer  in  mere 
Natural  Law  and  Natural  Selection  has  seen  only 
half  the  truth,  or  rather  he  has  not  seen  half  the 
truth.  Like  one  of  those  insects  which  he  may 
have  been  microscopically  examining,  he  has  seen 
only  the  smallest  objects.  Mole-like,  he  has  been 
burrowing  a  dark  and  confined  tunnel  through  the 
underground  clay,  instead  of  walking  upright  like 
a  man,  and  looking  around  him  on  the  extended 
earth,  and  up  into  the  expanse  of  heaven.  He  has 
used  the  microscope  and  seen  the  infinitely  little ; 
but  he  refuses  to  look  through  the  telescope,  which 
shows  him  how  the  littles  are  formed  into  structures 
of  infinite  greatness  and  grandeur.  All,  no  doubt, 
proceeds  from  natural  laws ;  but  these  are  made  to 
work  out  typical  forms,  geometrically  correct  and 
aesthetically  beaudful.  The  cold  winter  gives  us 
frost-work,  and  the  warm  summer  yields  us  flowers  ; 
and  contemporaneously  there  appear  intellect  and 
taste  to  measure  and  appreciate  it.  The  blind  forces 
are  made  by  One  who  has  eyes  to  evolve  ideas, 
patterns,  exemplars,  which  perceiving  minds  are 
constructed  to  behold  and  admire.  Finally,  above 
the  physical,  above  the  intellectual  even,  there  rises 
the  moral,  like  stars  out  of  the  star  dust,  or  rather 
like  stars  rising  out  of  these  other  stars,  only  brighter, 
purer,  and  more  enduring.  At  the  point  to  which 
we  have  come,  a  new  progression  is  opening  to  us 
in  an  endless  vista. 


THE  MORAL   POWER. 


^Z 


Darwin  has  caught  an  important  fact,  when  he 
says  that  there  is  a  principle  of  Natural  Selection  in 
nature  :  the  strong  live  and  multiply  and  increase  ; 
while  the  weak  die,  give  way,  and  disappear.  This 
is  certainly  a  law  of  the  plants  and  of  the  lower 
animals.  It  looks  in  the  earlier  periods  of  human 
history  as  if  this  law  were  still  the  ruling  one,  as 
if  bodily  strength  and  brute  force  were  to  subdue 
the  weak  and  hold  them  in  .subjection.  The  first 
empires  —  the  Egyptian,  the  Assyrian,  the  Baby- 
lonian, the  Persian  —  were  very  much  founded  on 
this  principle.  And  is  this  to  go  on  for  ever,  the 
pow^erful  tyrannizing  over  the  feeble,  men  making 
w^omen  do  all  the  menial  work,  and  the  great  body 
of  the  people,  even  in  such  civilized  countries  as 
Greece  and  Rome,  slaves  to  the  few?  In  the 
progression  of  events,  there  appear  clear  proofs 
that  the  old  law  is  to  give  way  before  a  higher 
to  which  it  is  subordinated.  There  are  indications 
that  intelligence  is  to  prevail  over  unreasoning 
force.  Nations  of  the  highest  mental  power  and 
cultivation,  such  as  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  begin 
to  take  the  lead,  and  rule  by  forethought,  by  coun- 
sel, by  firm  government. 

As  we  advance,  we  see  a  new,  a  still  more  impor- 
tant law  emerging,  and  urging  its  claim  not  only  to 
a  place,  but  a  supreme  place,  declaring  that  right  is 
above  might,  that  moral  good  is  higher  even  than 
intellectual  strength.  A  people  with  high  intelli- 
gence may  become  pleasure-loving,  sensual,  as  the 
Greeks  did  in  their  great  commercial  cities ;  may 


54  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

become  selfish,  cruel,  dissolute,  as  the  Romans  did 
in  the  decline  of  their  empire,  —  and  a  hardier  and  a 
more  moral  race  comes  in  like  a  fresh,  cool  breeze 
to  fill  up  the  heated  and  relaxing  atmosphere.  Not 
that  the  law  of  the  prevalence  of  strength  is  abso- 
lutel}^  set  aside,  but  it  is  subordinated  to  a  higher 
law,  or  rather  higher  laws,  which  limit  and  restrain 
it,  and  may  be  made  to  direct  and  to  elevate  it.  The 
intellectual  rises  above  the  physical,  and  asserts  its 
right  to  govern  it,  even  as  the  soul  claims  to  rule 
over  the  body.  But  there  is  more  :  the  moral  rises 
above  the  intellectual,  and  claims  that  the  under- 
standing should  be  obedient  to  it,  even  as  the 
conscience,  which  is  the  law  in  the  heart,  declares 
that  it  should  rule  over  the  head,  and  over  the 
whole  man.  Nay,  the  very  moral  ideas  and  senti- 
ments make  progress  by  purification  and  refine- 
ment :  an  earthl}'  morality  like  that  of  Jacob  is  made 
to  flame  into  the  love  of  John  ;  and  the  rigid  prohi- 
bitions of  the  commandments,  written  on  stone,  be- 
come the  blessings  of  the  discourses  of  Jesus,  meant 
to  be  written  on  the  fleshly  tables  of  the  heart. 

The  Law  of  Natural  Selection  —  that,  in  the  exu- 
berance of  seeds  and  organisms  and  species,  in  early 
nature  the  stronger  should  prevail  —  is  in  itself  a 
beneficent  one.  "All  changes  of  form  or  structure, 
all  increase  in  the  size  of  an  organ  or  its  complex- 
it}^  all  greater  specialization  or  physiological  divis- 
ion of  labor,  can  only  be  brought  about,  inasmuch 
as  it  is  for  the  good  of  the  being  so  modified."  *     It 

*  Wallace  on  Natural  Selection. 


THE    MORAL   POWER. 


55 


allows  the  weak,  after  enjoying  their  brief  time  of 
existence,  to  die  and  disappear;  while  the  vigorous 
leave  behind  a  still  stronger  progeny  to  rise  to  a 
fuller  development  and  intenser  enjoyments.  But 
there  are  stringent  limits  set  to  this  law.  It  is,  after 
all,  the  law  of  the  period  of  the  unconscious  plant 
and  irrational  brute.  It  comes  to  be  subordinated 
to  a  higher,  and  this  to  a  still  higher.  Intellect 
comes  later ;  but,  like  the  more  recent  geological 
formations,  it  mounts  the  highest,  and  overlies  and 
overlooks  all  the  rest.  Thought  gains,  and  it  retains, 
the  highest  positions ;  the  giants  disappear,  and  the 
civilized  peoples  take  their  place  ;  the  Canaanites, 
with  their  chariots  of  iron,  are  conquered  by  men 
who  carry  with  them  a  higher  mission ;  the  walls 
of  Jericho  fall  down  before  the  blowing  of  trumpets 
sounding  truth  to  all  people.  The  forests  are  cut 
down  to  let  the  fields  yield  corn  and  wheat,  and 
barley  and  vines,  and  figs  and  olives ;  and  trees 
are  left  only  for  shelter  and  for  lawn  ornaments. 
The  creatures  with  stings  and  claws  and  fangs  —  the 
foxes,  the  wolves,  the  leopards  —  give  way  before 
sheep  and  horses  and  kine.  There  is  still  a  struggle 
for  existence,  but  the  skill  which  devises  means  and 
invents  instruments  prevails  over  brute  force  and 
fierceness.  And  this  power  of  understanding  is 
destined  to  be  sublimed  into  something  nobler  and 
more  ethereal.  Above  the  dead  earth  and  agitated 
sea  there  is  to  rise  an  atmosphere  in  which  the 
living  are  to  breathe  and  move  and  fly.  The  intel- 
lectual era  seems  to  culminate  in  Greece  in  the  days 


56  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

of  Pericles,  when  free  thought  and  art  and  hterature 
have  reached  their  zenith.  But  in  that  very  age,  a 
new  and  a  vastly  greater  power  comes  into  view. 
Socrates  is  defeated,  and  yet  Socrates  conquers. 
He  drinks  the  hemlock,  and  dies ;  but  it  is  in  the 
hope  of  an  immortality.  His  body  is  burned ;  but 
the  flame  by  which  this  was  effected,  a  new  corre- 
lated force,  is  never  to  be  extinguished.  His  perse- 
cutors are  forgotten,  or  remembered  only  to  be 
execrated ;  but  the  moral  power  of  Socrates  still 
walks  our  earth.  A  new  struggle  for  existence 
has  begun.  It  was  exhibited  and  symbolized  at 
Thermopyl^,  where  the  power  of  numbers  was 
met  and  defeated  by  the  heroism  of  a  devoted  few. 
It  was  an  anticipation  of  what  was  to  come. 

But  there  were  better  prefigurations  of  it  among 
a  people  specially  called  and  set  apart  for  the  pur- 
pose ;  in  an  enslaved  race,  trained  to  become  the 
depositaries  of  the  truth,  and  in  due  time  the  mis- 
sionaries of  the  world ;  in  the  law  delivered  first, 
as  if  to  suit  the  ages  of  giant  strength,  amid  thunders 
and  Hghtnings  and  tempest,  and  the  voice  of  the 
trumpet  waxing  louder  and  louder,  and  then  com- 
ing forth  from  the  gentle  lips  of  Jesus ;  first  in  the 
strong  wind,  the  earthquake,  and  the  fire,  fol- 
lowed by  the  still,  small  voice,  which  is  specially 
the  voice  of  God  as  heard  in  the  later  prophets, 
and  still  more  sweetly  in  the  discourses  of  Him 
who  spake  as  never  man  spake.  In  due  time  the 
types,  the  bloody  sacrifices,  the  whole  burnt- 
offerings,  culminate  in  an  archetype,  in  which  we 


PLACE    OF   CHRIST. 


57 


see   the   highest  strength  coming  out  of  the  lowest 
weakness. 

This  new  struggle,  it  is  so  destined,  had  its  grand 
battle-field  on  Mount  Calvary.  You  may  see  it  all 
acted  on  the  cross  which  is  raised  high  there,  that  it 
may  draw  all  eyes  towards  it.  You  have  there  the 
writhings,  the  faintings,  the  cup  of  gall,  the  sponge 
filled  with  vinegar,  the  agony  closing  in  death  ;  and 
you  perceive,  at  the  same  time,  the  confidence  put 
in  him  by  suffering  and  loving  hearts,  — "Remem- 
ber me  when  thou  comest  into  thy  kingdom."  Yes, 
that  weakest,  most  forsaken  of  men  is  acknowl- 
edged as  a  king  and  as  having  a  kingdom  ;  and  his 
answer  is.  To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  this  king- 
dom of  paradise.  This  most  defenceless  of  men, 
who  uses  no  carnal  weapons,  who  refuses  to  bring 
down  fire  from  heaven  to  destroy  his  enemies, 
becomes  the  greatest  conqueror  which  this  world 
has  seen,  —  greater  than  the  Egyptian,  the  Baby- 
lonian, the  Greek,  or  the  Roman,  —  and  subdues 
under  him,  not  the  mere  bodies  of  men,  but  the 
loftiest  intellects  which  have  adorned  our  world,  and 
hearts  purified  and  burning  with  love.  He  rises 
out  of  the  grave,  to  become  a  victor  whose  triumphs 
know  no  end.  Crucified  as  a  slave  by  a  Roman 
deputy,  he  conquers  the  Roman  power ;  and  the 
emperor  who  fought  so  long  and  fiercely  against 
him  has  to  exclaim  with  his  djdng  breath,  "Thou 
hast  conquered  me,  O  Galilean  !  "  By  suffering,  he 
has  accomplished  ends  which  he  could  never  have 
gained  by  prosperity  and  success.     He  has  become 

3* 


2 8  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

perfect  through  suffering,  and  has  secured  the 
means  of  gaining  the  heart  of  the  sufferer  and  of 
elevating  the  fallen  :  the  fallen  man  who  clings  to 
him ;  the  fallen  woman  who  bathes  his  feet  with 
her  tears,  and  pours  forth  the  feelings  of  her  heart 
more  precious  than  the  ointment  from  the  alabaster 
box ;  the  fallen  nations,  as  seen  in  the  once  savage 
tribes  of  Germany  and  Britain,  who  have  been 
raised  by  Christianity  ;  and  of  exalting  the  fallen 
race  of  mankind,  who  have  thereby  risen  from 
condemnation  to  justification,  from  alienation  to 
reconciliation  with  God.  This  is  a  cause  for  the 
promotion  of  which,  this  is  a  lesson  for  the  teaching 
of  which,  it  w^as  worthy  of  God  to  become  flesh  and 
tabernacle  on  the  earth,  and  sufler  and  die.  He 
has  thereby  shown  that  there  is  something  greater 
in  him  than  his  almightiness.  I  have  sometimes 
felt  as  if  God  could  scarcely  be  regarded  by  us  as 
thoroughly  perfect,  unless  he  w^ere  capable  of  sub- 
mitting to  suffering.  I  have  felt  at  times  that,  if  this 
w^ere  denied  him,  his  creatures  might  reach  a  per- 
fection w4iich  he  has  not,  which  he  cannot  have.  I 
believe  that  the  Word  becoming  flesh  and  taber- 
nacling on  the  earth  is  an  essential  part  of  the  plan 
which  w^e  see  developing  before  our  eyes  ;  and  it 
seems  as  if  the  transaction  were  placed  in  the  very 
middle  of  the  ages,  as  the  keystone  of  the  bridge 
which  connects  the  two  compartments  of  God's 
w'orks,  — the  physical,  with  its  force  and  its  struggle 
for  existence,  with  the  moral,  with  its  sufferings  and 
its  triumphs.      In   earthly  affairs,  there  may  be  a 


THE  PRESENT  STRUGGLE.  59 

greater  glory  in  suffering  and  sorrow  than  in  pros- 
perity and  dazzling  splendor  :  there  may,  for  ex- 
ample, be  a  greater  glory  in  the  soldier's  death  than 
in  his  life ;  there  was  a  greater  glory  in  Samson's 
death  than  in  all  the  achievements  of  his  life.  But 
speak  not  of  the  glory  of  the  soldier  bleeding  in 
defence  of  a  nation's  rights ;  speak  not  of  the  glory 
of  the  patriot  toiling  and  suffering  and  dying  for 
his  country's  freedom  ;  speak  not  of  the  glory  ot 
the  martyr  calm  and  rejoicing  while  tied  to  the 
burning  stake  :  these  have  no  glory  because  of  the 
glory  that  excelleth,  —  the  glory  of  Christ's  conde- 
scension and  patience  and  love,  in  submitting  to 
shame,  to  sorrow,  and  to  death. 

Now  this  is  the  era  in  which  our  lot  is  cast.  This 
is  the  struggle  in  which  we  are  required  to  take  our 
part.  It  commenced  at  an  early  date  :  "  I  will  put 
enmity  between  thee  and  the  woman,  and  between 
thy  seed  and  her  seed  :  it  shall  bruise  thy  head, 
and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel."  The  serpent  is 
seen  bruising  the  heel  of  the  seed  of  the  woman. 
The  good  have  still  to  suffer,  but  in  their  suffering 
they  show  their  goodness.  We  are  in  a  dispensa- 
tion in  which  the  plant  must  be  bruised  before  it 
yields  its  odors,  in  which  the  rose  must  wither  be- 
fore it  yields  its  undying  perfume.  A  good  cause 
must  have  its  martyrs  before  it  triumphs.  John 
Brown  has  to  be  put  to  death  before  the  manacles 
are  struck  from  the  slave.  Your  Abraham  Lin- 
coln is  shot  in  the  midst  of  the  shouts  of  victory. 
"Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you.  Except  a  corn  of 


6o  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it  abideth 
alone  :  but  if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit. 
He  that  loveth  his  life  shall  lose  it;  and  he  that 
hateth  his  life  in  this  world  shall  keep  it  unto  life 
eternal." 

Let  us  realize  that  our  lot  is  cast  in  such  a  dis- 
pensation. There  are  strong  men,  and  seemingly 
wise  men,  in  our  day  who  do  not  see  it.  I  have  set 
myself  all  my  life  against  the  doctrine  taught  in  the 
works  of  Thomas  Carlyle  (or  rather  the  impres- 
sion left  by  them),  and  the  wTitings  of  others  who 
ape  him,  without  his  strength,  and  which  would  lead 
us  to  worship  heroes  and  deify  force.  I  repudiate 
the  principle  which  underlies  and  runs  through  the 
whole  of  Buckle's  "History  of  Civilization, "  that 
intellect  has  been,  is,  and  ought  to  be  the  grand 
moving  power  in  the  world.  True,  intellect  must 
always,  in  the  end,  be  the  main  agent  or  instrument 
in  helping  forward  the  advancement  of  the  race  ; 
but  it  is  only  in  the  sense  in  which  steam  is  the 
agent  in  moving  the  railway  cars.  In  contemplat- 
ing the  steam-engine,  we  rise  beyond  the  steam  to 
consider  the  mind  which  has  constructed  and  is 
guiding  the  whole;  so,  in  weighing  the  causes 
which  have  imparted  progress  to  humanity,  we 
must  look  beyond  the  intellectual  force  to  the  deeper 
moral  power  which  has  awakened  it.  Has  not  intel- 
ligence in  many  countries  —  as  in  Switzerland,  in 
Prussia,  in  Holland,  in  ScoUand,  in  New  Eng- 
land, and  in  other  States  of  the  Union  —  been  called 
forth  by  the  Reformation,  by  the  Covenanting  and 


DUTT  TO  SUPPORT  THE   WEAK.  6 1 

Puritan  faith?  and  nations  which  lose  that  faith 
may  find  that  they  have  cut  down  the  tree  on 
which  the  fruit  grew,  on  which  fruit  they  can  feed 
no  longer. 

Of  all  acts  of  cowardice,  the  meanest  is  that 
which  leads  us  to  abandon  a  good  cause  because  it 
is  weak,  and  join  a  bad  cause  because  it  is  strong. 
The  smitten  deer  is  said  to  be  avoided  by  the  herd,  — 
it  is  the  instinct  of  the  brute  ;  but  in  the  higher  law 
which  reigns  in  the  breast  of  mankind  and  woman- 
kind, 3'OU  never  saw  the  smitten  son  abandoned  by 
the  mother,  who  may  be  seen,  instead,  standing 
by  him  at  the  foot  of  the  cross  on  which  he  is  sus- 
pended, undeservedly  or  deservedly.  I  do  fear  that, 
in  my  past  life,  I  have  often  been  tempted  to  pay 
obeisance  to  false  gods ;  but  I  thank  the  great  God 
that  I  have  always  been  kept  from  that  prevalent 
form  of  idolatry  —  found  not  only  in  Persia  and  in 
the  East,  but  in  this  Western  world  —  which  wor- 
ships the  rising  sun.  I  confess  that  I  might  have 
been  enticed  to  adore  him  in  his  setting  splendors  ; 
that  is,  in  some  of  those  old  grandeurs  which  have 
had  their  day,  and  are  now  disappearing  in  a 
soft  radiance  which  they  did  not  possess  in  their 
zenith.  I  am  sure  that  there  is  nothing  in  my  past 
life  of  which  I  am  entitled  to  be  proud  ;  but  if  I 
could  take  credit  for  any  thing,  it  would  be  for 
the  fact,  that,  —  descended  from  Covenanting  fore- 
fathers, who,  not  contented  with  suffering  as  the 
Puritans  did,  went  on  to  resist  oppression  on  their 
heather  hills,  which  always  look  to  me  as  if  they  had 


62  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

been  dyed  with  their  blood,  —  I  have  in  the  great 
questions  of  the  day,  educational  and  religious,  in 
Scotland  and  in  Ireland,  cast  in  my  lot  with  the 
minority,  which  in  due  season  became  the  majority  ; 
and  when  I  left  any  cause,  it  was  because  it  had 
waxed  strong,  and  did  not  need  my  poor  aid.  We 
have  to  see  to  it  that,  in  the  struggle  of  life,  we 
stand  by  right,  and  not  by  might,  being  sure  that 
in  the  end  the  right  shall  have  the  might.  Should 
we  act  otherwise,  we  shall  certainly  fall  under  that 
law  of  degradation,  w^hich  requires  that  evil,  once 
committed,  goes  down  to  the  third  and  fourth  gen- 
eration of  them  that  hate  him,  when  God  gives 
men  up  to  the  consequences  of  their  own  iniquity, 
and  the  curse  alights  on  them  :  "  Curse  ye  Meroz, 
curse  ye  bitterly  the  inhabitants  thereof;  because 
they  came  not  to  the  help  of  the  Lord,  to  the  help 
of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty." 


III. 


Limits  to  the  Law  of  Natural  Selection.  —  This  World 
A  Scene  of  Struggle.  —  Appearance  of  Spiritual 
Life.  —  Final  Cause.  —  New  Life.  —  Unity  and 
Growth  in  the  World.  —  Higher  Products  coming 
FORTH.  —  Signs  of  Progress. 

T^HERE  are  clear  indications,  in  the  geological 
ages,  of  a  progression  from  the  inanimate  up 
to  the  animate,  and  from  the  lower  animate  to  the 
higher.  The  mind,  ever  impelled  to  seek  for 
causes,  asks  how  all  this  is  produced.  The  answer, 
if  answer  can  be  had,  is  to  be  given  by  science,  and 
not  by  religion  ;  which  simply  insists  that  we  trace 
all  things  up  to  God,  whether  acting  by  immediate 
or  by  mediate  agency.  Mr.  Darwin  would  refer  it 
all  to  the  somewhat  vaguely  enunciated  principle 
of  Natural  Selection,  or  the  preservation  of  the 
creatures  best  suited  to  their  circumstances,  and  the 
success  of  the  strong  in  the  struggle  of  life.  That 
this  principle  is  exhibited  in  nature,  and  working 
to  the  advancement  of  the  plants  and  animals  from 
age  to  age,  I  have  no  doubt.  We  see  it  operating 
before  our  eyes  every  spring,  when  we  find  the 
weak  plant  killed  by  the  frosts  of  winter,  and  the 


64-  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

strong  surviving  and  producing  a  progeny  strong 
as  itself.  But  it  has  not  been  proven  that  there  is 
no  other  principle  at  work.  I  am  not  satisfied  that 
this  principle  has  produced  life  out  of  dead  matter, 
that  it  has  produced  sentient  beings  out  of  insentient, 
that  it  has  wrought  the  conscious  mind  from  the 
unconscious  body,  that  it  has  generated  man  from 
the  brute.  There  is  no  positive  proof  that  it  has  so 
much  as  produced  a  new  species  of  animals  out  of 
old  ones.  In  regard  to  this  latter  point,  it  seems  to 
account  for  some  of  the  phenomena,  but  leaves 
others  unexplained.  In  particular,  there  are  gaps 
in  the  geological  ages  between  the  species  of  one 
age  and  those  of  another  age,  with  no  intermediate 
species  to  fill  it,  as  being  the  descendants  of  the 
one  and  the  progenitors  of  the  other.  There  must 
be  other  powers  and  principles  at  work  in  nature  as 
well  as  Natural  Selection. 

The  law  of  the  weak  being  made  to  give  way 
before  the  strong  is  very  apt  to  be  abused,  and  will 
certainly  be  perverted  by  those  who  do  not  take 
into  account  the  other  and  higher  laws  which  limit 
it,  and  are  expected  to  subordinate  it.  If  they  look 
to  it  alone,  they  will  understand  it  as  meaning  that 
the  poor  and  the  helpless  need  not  be  protected  or 
defended,  but  maybe  allowed  to  perish  :  thus  bring- 
ing us  down  to  the  condition  of  the  South  Sea 
Islanders,  who  kill  their  infants  ;  of  the  Hindoos 
and  Africans,  who  expose  their  aged  parents,  as 
having  become  useless.  If  this  doctrine  prevails, 
it  will  make  the  shadow  on  the  dial  of  time  go  back 


LIMITS  TO  NATURAL  SELECTION.  65 

for  ages,  and  bring  us  to  the  age  of  monster  ani- 
mals, or  monster  men,  like  Samson  or  like  Her- 
cules. Persons  would  look  upon  it  as  meaning 
that  the  uncivilized  races  may  be  allowed  to  disap- 
pear, without  an  effort  being  made  to  raise  them  ; 
a  principle  which,  in  old  times,  would  have  required 
that  our  German  or  British  or  Celtic  ancestors,  in 
the  days  of  Julius  Caesar,  and  as  described  by  him, 
should  have  been  allowed  to  die  out  and  to  vanish. 
Nature  itself,  if  only  we  condescend  to  discover  the 
final  cause  in  her  operations,  rebels  against  this 
cowardice,  and  shows  us  the  mother  loving  with  an 
especial  tenderness,  not  the  strong  son  who  can  do 
for  himself,  but  that  weak  boy  who  has  been  the 
object  of  her  care  from  his  infancy ;  and  she  will 
cherish  him,  in  the  hope  that  he  may  display  softer 
and  finer  traits  of  character  to  which  the  healthy 
youth  is  a  stranger.  If  the  tenet  which  I  am  de- 
nouncing come  to  be  the  prevailing  belief  in  this 
country,  it  will  issue  in  the  weak  races  on  this  con- 
tinent, the  Indian  and  the  Negro,  being  consigned 
to  a  slow  but  certain  dissolution ;  and  ridicule  will 
be  poured  on  the  attempts  which  philanthropic 
men  are  at  present  making  to  elevate  them  by 
schools  and  colleges,  by  justice  and  b}^  kindness. 
A  doctrine  this,  worse  than  slave-holding  in  its 
worst  features,  and  quite  as  likely  to  be  entertained 
by  the  self-sufficient  North  as  by  the  conquered 
South,  suffering  at  present  for  its  sins,  but  certain  to 
rise  in  the  future,  if  only  it  can  be  induced  to  aim 
at  raising  and  improving  that  race  which  of  late 


66  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

years  has,  all  unknowingly  to  itself,  had  so  impor- 
tant a  place  in  the  providential  dealings  of  God 
towards  this  country;  and  which,  as  it  remains 
among  us,  must  be  for  our  weal  or  our  woe,  accord- 
ing as  we  hasten  to  educate  them,  or  allow  them  to 
fall  into  deeper  degradation.  I  admit  the  tendency 
of  mankind  to  degenerate  ;  but  I  believe  in  a  power 
to  restrain  and  reverse  it.  It  was  the  power  which 
brought  our  Lord  on  that  morning  from  the  tomb, 
and  whose  function  it  is  to  enlighten  the  ignorant, 
to  strengthen  the  weak,  and  raise  the  fallen  ;  and, 
as  it  does  so,  to  put  what  it  attains  under  the  benefi- 
cent law  of  hereditary  descent,  so  that  it  may  go 
down  from  father  to  son,  and  from  one  generation 
to  another,  through  all  coming  ages. 

At  this  present  time,  the  two  theories  of  man's 
origin,  the  earth-born  and  the  heaven-born,  are 
striving  for  the  mastery.  According  to  the  earth- 
born  theory,  there  are  essentially  inferior  races, 
which  are  doomed  to  give  way  "in  the  struggle  for 
existence  ;  "  and  the  defenders  of  it  look  on  the  pros- 
pect with  complacency,  provided  a  few  favored  races 
are  enabled  to  advance  on  "  the  principle  of  natural 
selection."  I  believe  that  this  tenet  is  exercising, 
directly  or  indirectly,  a  very  injurious  influence  on 
public  sentiment  in  this  country  and  in  others.  This 
spirit  is  setting  itself  determinedly  against  mission- 
ary efi:brt,  is  scoffing  at  all  alleged  good  done  to  the 
degraded,  and  undermining  that  faith  among  our 
students  which  would  prompt  them  to  labor  for  the 
good  of  the   heathen  or  the  outcast.     In   the  last 


DUTY  OF  ELEVATING  THE  FALLEN.         67 

age  the  cry  was,  First  civilize,  and  then  Chris- 
tianize ;  and  it  was  uttered  by  men  who  took  no 
pains  either  to  civiHze  or  to  Christianize.  The 
feehng  now  is,  that  it  is  of  no  use  attempting  to 
elevate  the  inferior  races,  and  that  they  may  be 
allowed  to  disappear,  provided  the  higher  races 
(such  as  the  Aryan,  and  specially  the  Anglo-Saxon) 
are  made  to  take  their  place.  It  is  a  fit  creed  and 
sentiment  for  those  who  wish  to  make  the  heathen, 
or  the  sunken  among  whom  they  dwell,  the  ministers 
of  their  grasping  selfishness  or  of  their  lusts,  with- 
out being  troubled  with  any  reproaches  of  con- 
science. How  different  in  its  practical  bearing  is 
the  faith  of  the  Christian,  who  holds  that  God  has 
"  made  of  one  blood  all  nations  ;  "  and  that  all  human 
beings  are  alike  in  that  they  possess  souls  capable 
of  improvement  and  destined  to  live  for  ever ! 
Catching  the  spirit  of  Him  who  stood  by  the  weak 
against  the  strong,  who  came  to  seek  and  save 
that  which  was  lost,  who  permitted  the  woman  who 
was  a  sinner  to  approach  him,  and  ever  sought  to 
raise  the  fallen,  the  disciple  of  Christ  recognizes  as 
brothers  and  sisters  the  lowest  specimens  of  hu- 
manity, whether  found  in  pagan  lands  or  in  the 
lowest  sinks  of  our  cities  ;  and,  having  experienced 
the  power  of  truth  and  grace  upon  his  own  heart, 
he  goes  forth  in  the  efficacy  of  the  blood  of  Christ, 
and  in  the  regenerating  power  of  the  Spirit,  to  ele- 
vate them  for  this  world  and  the  next.  Need  I  ask 
which  of  these  is  the  genuine  philanthropy,  most 
worthy  of  heaven,  and  suited  to  earth  and  to  man's 


68  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

nature?  I  for  one  would  not  like  to  see  all  the 
varieties  of  mankind  disappear,  and  the  whole 
reduced  to  one  race,  though  that  should  be  the 
Anglo-Saxon,  any  more  than  I  would  like  to  see 
all  the  trees  of  the  forest  reduced  to  one  species, 
though  that  should  be  the  oak.  I  rejoice  in  the 
diversity  which  I  see  in  all  nature, — in  sea  and 
land,  in  hill  and  vale,  in  plant  and  animal ;  and  I 
should  like  to  see  each  race  of  mankind  retaining 
its  peculiarities,  while  all  are  elevated  ;  so  that  the 
song  of  praise  coming  from  regenerated  humanity 
to  the  great  Creator  may  not  be  a  mere  melody,  but 
a  harmony  rising  from  "  a  great  multitude,  which 
no  man  can  number,  of  all  nations,  and  kindreds, 
and  peoples,  and  tongues." 

We  have  seen  that  there  are  insuperable  diffi- 
culties, even  in  a  Natural  History  point  of  view,  in 
the  theory  that  man  is  sprung  from  the  brutes. 
And  man  appears  in  a  state  of  things  suited  to  him, 
and  evidently  prepared  for  him,  in  plants  and  ani- 
mals ready  to  afford  him  food  and  clothing  and 
shelter  and  defence,  and  also  to  gratify  and  to  edu- 
cate his  sense  of  beauty.  Often  have  I  heard  my 
lamented  friend  Hugh  Miller  fondly  dilating  on  this 
last  subject.  "They  tell  that  man's  world,  with  all 
its  griefs  and  troubles,  is  more  emphatically  a  world 
of  flowers  than  any  of  the  creations  that  preceded 
it ;  and  that  as  one  great  family,  the  Grasses,  were 
called  into  existence,  in  order  apparently  that  he 
might  enter,  in  favoring  circumstances,  upon  his 
two   earliest  avocations,    and    be    in   good    hope   a 


APPEARANCE   OF  MAN.  69 

keeper  of  herds  and  a  tiller  of  the  ground ;  and  as 
another  family  of  plants,  the  Rosaceas,  was  created, 
in  order  that  the  gardens,  which  it  would  be  also 
one  of  his  vocations  to  keep  and  to  dress,  should 
have  their  trees  '  good  for  food  and  pleasant  to  the 
taste  : '  so  flowers  in  general  were  properly  produced 
just  ere  he  appeared,  to  minister  to  the  sense  of 
beauty  which  distinguishes  him  from  all  other  creat- 
ures, and  to  which  he  owes  not  a  few  of  his  most 
exquisit-e  enjoyments."  It  does  not  appear  as  if  the 
surrounding  circumstances  could  have  produced 
man,  or  that  man  could  have  produced  the  surround- 
ing circumstances  ;  and  in  their  contemporaneous 
appearance  and  mutual  adaptation  —  man  loving 
flowers,  and  flowers  being  cared  for  by  him  and 
improved  —  we  may  discover  traces  of  design. 

When  human  beings  come  on  the  field,  a  new 
era  commences,  even  in  Natural  History.  Man 
modifies  Natural  Selection,  by  bringing  things  to- 
gether which  are  separated  in  physical  geograph}^. 
The  commission  to  him  was :  "  Be  fruitful,  and 
multiply,  and  replenish  the  earth,  and  subdue  it : 
and  have  dominion  over  the  fish  of  the  sea,  and 
over  the  fowl  of  the  air,  and  over  every  living  thing 
that  moveth  upon  the  earth."  Henceforth  he  acts 
on  natural  agents  to  modify  and  improve  them  ; 
causing  the  earth  to  wave  with  grain  and  with  fruits, 
and  substituting  sheep  and  kine  and  horses  for  wild 
and  destructive  animals. 

And  as  ages  roll  on,  there  is  doubtless  a  progres- 
sion in  human  nature.     The  intellectual  comes  to 


70  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

rule  the  physical,  and  the  moral  claims  to  sub- 
ordinate both.  It  is  no  longer  strength  of  body 
that  prevails,  but  strength  of  mind ;  while  the  law 
of  God  proclaims  itself  superior  to  both.  There 
is  still  a  Law  of  Natural  Selection  :  but,  under  the 
new  dispensation,  the  strong  has  met  with  a  still 
stronger ;  and  right,  which  is  the  strongest,  would 
regulate  both  the  strong  body  and  the  stronger 
mind.  It  may  still  be  that  the  strongest,  the  fittest, 
are  to  prevail ;  but  it  is  becoming  evident  that  the 
strongest  and  the  fittest  are  not  physical,  or  even 
intellectual  strength,  but  the  moral  forces  supported 
by  the  righteous  God.  But  all  this  is  to  be  accom- 
plished and  manifested  by  a  struggle,  in  which  we  see 
that  "God  hath  chosen  the  foolish  things  of  the  world 
to  confound  the  wise  ;  and  God  hath  chosen  the  weak 
things  of  the  world  to  confound  the  things  which  are 
mighty;  and  base  things  of  the  world,  and  things 
which  are  despised,  hath  God  chosen  ;  yea,  and  things 
which  are  not,  to  bring  to  nought  things  that  are.'' 

The  champions  of  Natural  Religion,  in  defending 
the  great  doctrines  of  the  Existence  and  Goodness 
of  God,  have  often  drawn  far  too  fair  a  picture  of 
the  state  of  our  world.  Keeping  sin  and  misery 
entirely  out  of  sight,  they  argue  as  if  there  were 
nothing  but  beneficence  to  be  seen.  But  this  world 
is  not  now,  and,  so  far  as  science  throws  light  on  the 
subject,  it  never  has  been,  in  the  state  in  which  the 
sentimental  believer  in  theism  represents  it,  or  would 
wish  it  to  be.  Whatever  we  might  expect  or  desire, 
our  world  is  not  now,  and  has  never  been,  a  scene  of 


STRUGGLE  IN  THE  HUMAN  PERIOD,  71 

perpetual  calm  and  never-ending  sunshine,  of  peace 
and  unmixed  happiness,  or  of  unbroken  love  on  the 
part  of  every  creature  to  every  other.  On  the  con- 
trary, there  have  been  in  it,  from  the  beginning, 
warring  elements  and  raging  storms  and  creatures 
devouring  each  other.  It  is  a  world  in  which  there 
are  now,  and  ever  have  been  since  life  began,  pain 
and  suffering,  and  the  struggle  of  individuals  and 
races  for  existence  and  for  mastery.  Yet,  in  the 
midst  of  these  scenes,  we  see  clear  proofs  of  con- 
trivance and  wisdom  and  kindness  in  the  fittings 
of  things  into  each  other,  and  the  evidently  benefi- 
cent end  of  every  organ  of  the  animal  frame,  and  in 
good  being  brought  out  of  evil.  The  ocean  is  in 
many  respects  an  emblem  of  this  world  of  ours,  — 
often  so  calm  as  to  reflect  heaven  upon  its  bosom, 
but  at  times  stirred  into  turbulence  and  revealing 
awful  depths.  There  was  a  struggle  in  the  pre- 
Adamite  ages.  There  is  a  struggle  in  the  human 
ages.  The  earth  yields  thorns  and  thistles,  and 
man  has  to  eat  bread  in  the  sweat  of  his  face. 
Some  of  us  were  cherishing  the  idea  that,  in 
consequence  of  advancing  intelligence,  wars  would 
very  much  cease.  But  this  cannot  be  —  perhaps  we 
might  go  farther,  and  say  it  ought  not  to  be  —  as  long 
as  such  evils  exist  in  our  world  ;  certain  it  is,  it  will 
not  be  till  moral  sentiment  reaches  a  higher  growth 
and  exercises  greater  power.  In  our  day,  we  have 
had,  first  in  the  western  continent,  and  now  in  the 
eastern,  the  two  most  desolating  wars  of  which  the 
earth  has  been  the  theatre ;  both,  it  may  be,  crush- 


72  NATURAL    THEOLOGT: 

ing  much  evil,  but  both  attended  with  awful  suffer- 
ing, bodily  and  mental.  The  world,  in  its  whole 
structure  and  administration,  shows  the  goodness  of 
God  ;  but  it  manifests  other  qualities,  so  that  as  we 
look  at  it  we  "behold  the  goodness  and  severity  of 
God."  It  looks  as  if,  from  the  beginning  until  now, 
our  w^orld  were  meant  to  be  a  probation,  a  battle-field. 
And  is  not  this  the  very  view  the  Scriptures  give  of 
it,  —  a  contest  between  the  good  and  the  evil,  a  tri- 
umph and  then  true  peace  ?  "  The  whole  creation 
groaneth  and  travaileth  in  pain  together  until  now." 
Our  academic  theists  were  refusing  to  look  at  our 
world  under  this  aspect.  Even  some  of  our  senti- 
mental Christians  were  turning  away  from  it.  It  is 
a  curious  circumstance  that  it  is  science  that  has 
recalled  our  attention  to  it.  The  fool,  as  he  looks  at 
these  things,  will  say  in  his  heart  that  there  is  no 
God ;  and  the  proud  man  will  say,  "  Who  is  the 
Lord  that  we  should  obey  him?"  But  he  who  is 
open  to  receive  the  truth,  and  the  whole  truth,  will 
discover  and  acknowledge  that  we  live  in  a  scene 
in  which  there  is  the  good,  but  in  which  there  is  also 
the  evil,  and  in  which  it  is  evidently  appointed  by 
God  that  the  good  is  to  gain  the  victory,  and  "  the 
earnest  expectation  of  the  creature  waiteth  "  for  it, 
and  "  the  creature  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from 
the  bondage  of  corruption." 

But  in  order  to  this  a  new  power  appears  on  the 
earth.  And  it  appears  in  the  person  of  One  who  is 
identified  with  man,  being  born  of  a  woman,  and 
bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh  of  our  flesh,  and  who 


APPEARANCE   OF  CHRIST.  73 

yet  descends  from  a  higher  sphere.  The  first  man, 
notwithstanding  his  fall,  was  a  great  advance  on  all 
that  had  gone  before :  but  the  second  man  was 
immeasurably  more  so.  "  And  so  it  is  written, 
The  first  man  Adam  w^as  made  a  living  soul, 
the  last  Adam  was  made  a  quickening  spirit." 
He  is  the  representative,  as  he  is  the  administrator, 
in  fact  the  life,  of  this  new  moral  power  which 
came  down  from  heaven.  He  fits  in  with  all  that 
has  gone  before.  There  were  predictions  of  him 
in  nature  as  well  as  in  the  Word,  —  predictions  of 
him  already  fulfilled,  and  many  more  remaining  to 
be  accomplished.  "  Lo,  I  come  (in  the  volume  of 
the  book  it  is  written  of  me)."  He  comes  in  the 
fulness  of  time  into  a  world  which  was  prepared 
for  him,  not  in  the  sense  of  being  ready  to  receive 
him,  but  in  the  sense  of  needing  him.  In  con- 
formity with  the  very  nature  of  our  world,  with  all 
that  had  gone  before  he  comes  to  engage  in  a  strug- 
gle ;  he  has  to  fight  a  battle  with  evil,  and  to  gain  a 
victory.  He  has,  in  accordance  with  the  whole 
purpose  of  God  in  our  world,  to  show  his  power  by 
contending  with  the  evil,  and  thereby  conquering 
and  subduing  it.  "  Who  is  this  that  cometh  from 
Edom,  with  dyed  garments  from  Bozrah?  this  that 
is  glorious  in  his  apparel,  travelling  in  the  great- 
ness of  his  strength?  I  that  speak  in  righteousness, 
mighty  to  save.  Wherefore  art  thou  red  in  thine 
apparel,  and  thy  garments  like  him  that  treadeth  in 
wine-fat?  I  have  trodden  the  wine-press  alone,  and 
of  the  people  there  was  none  with  me."     This,  in 


74  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

accordance  with  the  whole  past  of  our  world,  —  a 
world  in  which  there  had  ever  been  the  shedding 
of  blood,  a  world  in  w^hich  there  had  been  sin  since 
man  appeared;  and  here  is  One,  "without  father, 
without  mother,  without  descent,"  who  has  come  to 
bear  dow^n  all  opposition  and  to  remove  every  evil. 
"Gird  thy  sword  upon  thy  thigh,  O  most  mighty, 
with  thy  glory  and  thy  majesty.  And  in  thy  majesty 
ride  prosperously,  because  of  truth  and  meekness 
and  righteousness  ;  and  thy  right  hand  shall  teach 
thee  terrible  things.  Thine  arrows  are  sharp  in  the 
heart  of  the  king's  enemies ;  whereby  the  people 
fall  under  thee." 

Closely  connected  with  the  work  of  Christ  is 
another  work  ;  the  one  developing  out  of  the  other, 
as  in  all  the  operations  of  God.  It  w^as  expedient 
that  Jesus  should  finish  his  work,  and  go  away,  in 
order  that  another  Agent  might  appear,  and  intro- 
duce a  new  life  into  our  world.  That  life  proceeded 
from  Christ's  grave,  but  is  sent  down  by  Christ 
from  heaven.  The  Spirit  takes  of  the  things  that 
are  Christ's,  and  shows  them  unto  us.  A  new  life 
now  manifests  itself  to  us  ;  not  sprung  from  the 
earth,  but  descending  from  a  higher  region.  It 
comes  in  silently  and  imperceptibly ;  so  has  life 
alwa^'s  done,  —  the  life  of  the  plant,  the  life  of  the 
animal.  "The  wind  bloweth  w^here  it  listeth,  and 
thou  hearest  the  sound  thereof,  but  canst  not  tell 
whence  it  cometh,  and  w^hither  it  goeth  :  so  is  every 
one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit."  It  is  a  reality,  as 
every  Christian   can  testify  :    "  One  thing  I   know, 


MINISTRATION  OF   THE   SPIRIT.  75 

that  whereas  I  was  blind,  now  I  see."  This  is  an 
assuring  fact  to  the  man  himself,  and  others  might 
do  well  to  ponder  it.  "  But  by  what  he  now  seeth 
we  know  not."  We  can  tell  as  little  of  the  manner 
of  it,  as  we  can  of  the  natural  life  within  us,  which 
we  feel  in  every  organ  of  our  body  ;  as  little  of  its 
mode  of  introduction,  as  the  man  of  science  can  of  the 
introduction  of  life,  or  sensation,  or  consciousness. 
But  the  appearance  of  this  new  life  is  in  analogy 
with  all  that  has  gone  before,  —  analogous  to  the 
appearance  of  plant  life  and  animal  life  and  human 
life;  analogous,  also,  to  what  has  preceded,  inas- 
much as,  while  it  is  something  superinduced,  it  is 
not  independent  of  what  has  gone  before.  The 
plant  contains  something  higher  than  dead  matter, 
but  gathers  up  into  itself  all  the  properties  of  inani- 
mate matter ;  the  animal  has  sensation  not  in  the 
vegetable,  but  retains  and  uses  all  the  qualities  of 
the  plant ;  and  man  has  more  than  the  brute,  but 
retains  all  the  animal  endowments.  "So  is  every 
one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit."  Man  has  within  his 
compound  nature  dead  matter  and  living  matter  and 
sentient  matter,  and  all  his  powers  of  intellect  and 
feeling  just  as  he  had  before  ;  but  he  has  something 
higher,  controlling,  enlivening,  and  guiding  them. 
It  is  a  new  power,  3^et  not  separated  from  the  old 
powers;  but  grafted  upon  the  old,  as  the  chemical 
is  upon  the  mechanical,  as  the  vital  is  upon  the 
chemical,  and  the  mental  on  the  vital.  There  is  no 
proof  that,  in  historical  times,  any  new  species  of 
animal  has  appeared  ;  but  here,  in  the  human  period^ 


76  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

is  a  new  power,  suited  to  the  new  era.  There  were 
intimations  of  it  in  the  Old  Testament.  But  it  was 
fully  revealed  when  our  Lord  "  spake  of  the  Spirit 
which  they  that  believe  on  Him  should  receive." 
We  thus  see,  more  clearl}^  than  we  could  before 
these  recent  paleontological  investigations,  that  there 
has  been  a  unity  in  God's  mode  of  administra- 
tion on  our  earth,  in  all  ages.  We  have  new  life 
appearing  in  the  geological  ages,  and  new  life  in 
the  historical  ages.  No  doubt  it  all  follows  laws ; 
that  is,  order  and  progression.  There  was  doubt- 
less law  in  the  appearance  of  species  in  the  geologic 
ages.  There  seem  to  be  laws  in  the  operations  of 
the  Spirit.  It  is  "  like  the  wdnd  which  bloweth 
where  it  listeth ;  "  but  the  wind  has  laws  :  so  it  is 
with  the  work  of  the  Spirit  in  the  soul  and  in  the 
world.  But  in  the  case  of  the  appearance  of  each 
of  these  modes  of  life,  we  see  too  little  of  the  arc 
to  be  able  to  describe  the  whole  circle. 

We  now  see  clearl}^  the  nature  of  the  dispensation 
under  which  we  live,  —  the  dispensation  of  the 
Spirit.  There  is,  as  there  has  been,  in  our  earth,  a 
struggle.  But  the  contest  is  not  between  element 
and  element,  between  the  brutes  and  the  elements, 
or  between  animal  and  animal.  It  is  first  a  contest 
between  man  and  nature,  but  it  has  also  become  a 
contest  between  the  spiritual  and  the  natural.  It  is 
specially  a  contest  between  sin  and  holiness.  We 
see  it  in  the  heart  of  every  man  in  the  contest  be- 
tween the  passions  raging  like  the  sea  and  the 
conscience  that  would  restrain  them.     We  see  it  in 


THE    GOOD   PREVAILS.  77 

the  heart  of  every  believer,  in  which  "  the  flesh 
lusteth  against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against  the 
flesh  ;  and  these  are  contrary  the  one  to  the  other." 
We  see  it  in  the  world,  which  is  a  great  battle-field, 
in  which  the  combatants  are  truth  and  error,  pol- 
lution and  purity.  There  are  clear  indications  as  to 
which  side  is  to  gain  the  victory.  True,  we  "see 
not  yet  all  things  put  under  Him  :  "  and  the  reason 
is  that  we  are  in  the  heart  of  the  battle,  and  have  a 
work  to  do ;  and  not  at  the  close,  to  survey  calmly 
what  has  been  done.  But  there  are  powers  operat- 
ing, —  powers  of  God  which  are  sure  to  prevail. 
"  Magna  est  Veritas,  et  prevalebit."  The  conscience 
in  the  heart  claiming  supremacy  is  only  a  symbol 
of  the  good  asserting  its  right  to  reign,  and  subdue 
all  things  to  itself.  The  believer  dies  like  Samson, 
midst  the  glories  of  his  strength,  and  slays  in  his 
death  the  last  of  his  spiritual  enemies.  The  light 
has  as  yet  been  only  partially  shed  on  our  earth, 
but  the  sun  has  arisen  which  is  to  go  round  our 
globe.  The  work  of  the  Spirit  is  at  present  only 
partial ;  but  we  have  the  assurance  that  the  time  is 
at  hand,  "when  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  be 
poured  on  all   flesh." 

We  have  been  obliged,  in  this  rapid  run  through 
the  ages,  to  step  as  with  seven-leagued  boots  from 
mountain-top  to  mountain-top,  without  being  able 
to  descend  into  the  connections  to  be  found  in  the 
interesting  valleys  lying  between.  And  what  have 
we  gathered? 


78  NA TUBAL    THE OLOGT. 

(i.)  Wc  have  discovered  everywhere  traces  of 
Ends,  or  Final  Cause.  The  whole  school  with  which 
I  am  arguing  are  ever  seeking  to  set  aside  or  dispar- 
age final  cause.  Some  of  them  clothe  their  pride  in 
the  garb  of  humility,  and  declare  that  it  would  be 
presumptuous  in  them  to  discover  the  purposes  of 
Deitv.  Thev  are  fond  of  claimino-  Francis  Bacon 
as  countenancinfj  them.  It  mav  be  of  some  mo- 
ment  to  inquire  what  was  the  precise  teaching  of 
that  far-sighted  and  sagacious  man  on  this  subject 
He  adopts  A?.-istotle's  fourfold  division  of  causes  : 
the  Material,  or  the  matter  out  of  which  a  thing  is 
formed  ;  the  Efficient,  by  which  it  is  formed  ;  the 
Formal,  the  form  which  it  takes;  and  the  Final, 
being  the  end  which  it  is  made  to  serve.*  It  could 
be  shown,  did  my  subject  require  or  admit,  that 
there  is  a  deeper  foundation  for  this  division  than 
later  philosophers  are  disposed  to  allow.  If  we 
w^ant  to  account  for  a  thing,  our  inquiry  will  be, 
Out  of  what  is  it  made  ;  by  what  has  it  been  made  ; 
w^hat  is  the  form  or  nature  which  it  has  been  made 
to  take;  and  what  purposes  is  it  meant  to  serve? 
Bacon  sanctions  and  uses  this  distinction ;  and 
in  his  division  of  the  sciences  he  proceeds  upon  it, 
and  allots  Material  and  Efficient  Causes  to  Physics, 
and  Formal  and  Final  to  Metaphysics,  which  he 
places  above  Physics.  He  condemns  those  who  in 
Physics  would  mix  up  the  inquir}^  into  Final  with 
that  into  Efficient  Cause ;  as  if  one,  who  would 
determine  the  nature  of  the  clouds,  should  satisfy 

*  Aristotle,  Metaphysics,  B.  iii.  c  I. 


BACON  AND   FINAL    CAUSE.  79 

himself  with  saying  that  they  are  placed  in  the  sky 
to  water  the  earth  with  showers.  His  language  on 
this  subject  is  not  so  guarded  as  it  ought  to  be.  In 
physiology,  which  inquires  into  the  relations  of 
structure  in  the  plant  and  animal,  we  look  to  ends  : 
it  was  in  the  very  age  in  which  Bacon  lived,  that 
Harvey,  finding  that  the  valves  in  the  veins  opened 
one  wa}^  as  if  to  let  a  liquid  pass,  but  did  not  open 
on  the  other,  argued,  on  the  principle  of  final  cause, 
that  the  blood  must  circulate  in  the  fram.e.  Still, 
Bacon  is  so  far  right  that  it  is  not  expedient  to  mix 
the  inquiry  into  ph3^sical  cause  with  the  inquiry  into 
final.  But  Bacon  takes  Final  Cause  from  Physics, 
simply  to  carry  it  up  to  a  higher  region  and  allot  it 
to  Metaphysics,  which  lift  us  to  Theology,  to  God 
and  Providence,  by  Formal  and  Final  Causes.  In 
his  own  graphic  way  he  likens  final  causes  to  the  ves- 
tal virgins,  barren  of  fruit,  but  consecrated  to  God.* 

Just  as  there  is,  and  should  be,  an  inquiry  into 
Efficient  Cause,  so  there  may  be,  so  should  there 
be,  an  inquiry  into  Final  Cause.  The  Final  Cause 
is  often  more  obvious  than  the  Efficient.  The  end 
of  the  eye  and  of  the  ear,  which  is  to  enable  us  to 
see  and  to  hear,  presses  itself  more  on  our  notice 
than  the  physical  agencies  which  have  produced 
these  complicated  organs. 

We  see  now  the  importance  and  the  application 
of  the  two  preliminary  points  laid  down  in  my  first 
lecture.  We  see  that  because  we  have  discovered 
a  physical   cause,  we  are  not  precluded  from  an 

*  De  Augmentis  Scientiarum,  iii.  4. 


8o  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

inquiry  into  final  cause.  When  we  discover  that  a 
telescope  works  by  the  laws  of  mechanism  and  of 
light,  we  are  not  to  be  kept  from  noticing  the  design 
of  the  instrument,  which  is  to  aid  the  eye  in  giving 
us  a  view  of  remote  objects.  Mr.  Darwin  has 
thrown  out  the  idea  that  the  eye,  as  found  in  the 
higher  animals  (such  as  the  eagle),  may  have  been 
formed  on  the  principle  of  natural  selection,  in  the 
course  of  millions  of  ages,  from  the  simple  appara- 
tus —  found  in  lower  creatures  —  of  an  optic  nerve 
coated  with  pigment.  Such  a  theory  appears  to 
many  to  be  far-fetched  and  wire-drawn.  He 
acknowledges  that  in  such  a  case  he  cannot  point 
out  the  transitional  grades.  But  suppose  that  he 
could  establish  his  hj'pothesis,  we  should  still  see 
the  necessity  of  calling  in  a  number  of  adaptations 
to  account  for  the  wonderful  and  complicated  result. 
We  should  first  have  to  presuppose  a  nerve  sen- 
sitive to  light.  On  this,  all  that  he  has  to  remark 
is,  "  How  a  nerve  comes  to  be  sensitive  to  light 
hardly  concerns  us  more  than  how  life  itself  first 
originated."  *  And  all  I  have  to  remark  is,  that 
Mr.  Darwin,  in  accounting  for  so  many  phenomena 
by  natural  law,  does  not  so  much  as  attempt  to 
account  for  the  origin  of  life,  or  of  nerve  force. 
And  then,  secondly,  we  must  see  the  adaptations 
which  have  secured  that  substances  should  attach 
themselves  to  the  nerve  till  it  becomes  the  beautiful 
mechanism  of  the  eye  of  the  higher  animals  and 
of  man.     And  finally  we  have  not  to  overlook  the 

*  Origin  of  Species,  chap.  vi. 


PHYSICAL   AND   FINAL    CAUSE.  8 1 

most  wonderful  fact  of  all,  that  this  structure  enables 
the  animal  to  see.  In  like  manner,  when  we  have 
traced  the  formation  of  the  animal  frame  to  cer- 
tain powers,  mechanical,  chemical,  and  vital,  —  or 
because  we  suppose  we  have  resolved  the  vital 
power  into  the  chemical,  and  the  chemical  into 
the  mechanical, — this  should  not  prevent  us  from 
looking  at  the  obvious  purpose  served  by  the  eye, 
the  ear,  and  every  organ  of  the  body.  So,  should 
it  be  found  that  the  elevation  of  species  proceeds 
from  the  laws  of  heredity  —  it  may  be  from  the  law 
of  selection  —  this  would  not  even  tend  to  lessen  the 
force  of  the  argument  from  design.  We  see,  too, 
the  importance  of  the  other  preliminary  point,  that 
because  we  are  unacquainted  with  the  precise  nature 
of  the  forces  in  operation  we  are  not  thereby  to  be 
precluded  from  discovering  a  purpose.  The  work- 
man may  be  very  imperfectly  acquainted  with  the 
agencies  employed  in  his  factory,  but  he  is  sure 
that  there  are  method  and  design  in  the  machine 
which  turns  out  such  products.  I  believe  that  the 
most  profound  physiologist  has  penetrated  but  a  very 
little  way  into  the  secret  machinery  of  the  life  of 
the  individual  plant  and  animal,  and  still  less  into 
the  agencies  which  produce  one  plant  or  animal 
from  another ;  and  less  still  into  the  powers,  what- 
ever they  be,  which  made  organisms  progress  from 
one  geologic  age  to  another.  But  he  has  only  to 
open  his  eyes,  and  allow  his  intellect  to  follow  its 
spontaneous  course,  to  discover  that  in  every  organ 
of  the  animated  being,  and  in  the  development  of 

4* 


82  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

the  organic  being,  there  is  an  end  to  accomplish, 
and  a  means  to  accomplish  it. 

But  it  will  be  necessary,  at  this  place,  to  answer 
some  of  the  objections  brought  by  this  school  against 
the  doctrine  of  discoverable  ends  in  nature.  These 
objections  have  no  novelty  in  them.  They  have 
been  answered,  at  least  in  substance,  a  hundred 
times;  but  they  require  to  be  answered  once  more, 
since  they  continue  to  be  urged. 

There'  are  physiologists  who  would  blunt  the 
edge  of  the  argument,  by  saying  that  the  organ, 
which  suits  the  exigencies  of  the  animal  so  nicely, 
is  only  the  "condition  of  the  existence"  of  the 
animal.  I  do  not  object  to  this  language  ;  which  is 
said  to  have  been  introduced  by  Cuvier,  so  fond  of 
discovering  final  cause.  Our  argument  is  drawn 
from  the  very  circumstance  that  so  many  and  such 
complicated  conditions  should  meet  to  supply  the 
w^ants,  and  promote  the  comfort,  and,  it  may  be, 
the  beauty  and  utility,  of  the  living  creature. 

It  is  asserted  that  in  many  cases  we  cannot  see  the 
end  contemplated.  The  reply  is  not  far  to  seek.  In 
order  to  discover  design  in  a  structure,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  we  should  be  able  to  declare  the  meaning 
of  every  part  of  it.  The  soldier  may  see  enough  to 
convince  him  that  there  is  plan  in  bringing  so  many 
men  together  to  form  that  powerful  army,  and  skill 
in  conducting  that  successful  campaign,  though  he 
be  not  able  to  fathom  all  the  intentions  of  the  com- 
mander, or  discover  why  this  regiment  is  required 
to  move  in  this  rather  than  in  that  direction.     We 


OBJECTIONS    TO  FINAL    CAUSE.  S3 

may  be  able  reverently  to  discover  purposes  in 
God's  works,  without  pretending  to  be  able  to  find 
out  what  God  doeth  from  the  beginning  to  the  end. 

"To  the  hypothesis  of  special  creations,"  says 
Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,*  "  a  difficulty  is  presented  by 
the  absence  of  high  forms  of  life  during  those 
innumerable  epochs  of  the  earth's  existence  which 
geology  records.  But  to  the  hypothesis  of  evolution 
this  absence  is  no  such  obstacle.  Suppose  evolu- 
tion, and  this  question  is  necessarily  excluded. 
Suppose  special  creations,  and  this  question  (un- 
avoidably raised)  can  have  no  satisfactory  answer." 
I  am  not  at  present  standing  up  either  for  or  against 
special  creations  ;  but  surely  the  facts  referred  to 
have  no  bearing,  real  or  apparent,  in  opposition 
to  the  doctrine  of  final  cause.  Whether  it  has  been 
by  special  creation  or  b}^  evolution,  there  are  plan 
and  purpose  visible  in  the  number  and  variety  of 
animated  beings  ;  in  all  God's  creatures,  even  the 
lowest,  enjoying  life ;  and  in  the  lower  creatures 
rising  to  the   higher. 

Mr.  Lewes  urcres  that  the  circumstance  that  so 
many  of  the  seeds  floating  in  the  air  and  water  never 
germinate  into  plants  and  animals,  is  an  evidence 
of  failure,  and  is  inconsistent  with  final  cause. f 
But  may  it  not  be  the  very  purpose  of  God,  by 
the  superabundance  of  germs,  to  secure  that  there 
should  be  living  beings  everywhere  (in  every  hole 
and  crann}')  enjoying  life  or  nourishing  life?  We 
know,  too,  that  many  of  these  superfluous  (as  they 

*  Prin.  of  Biol.  P.  iii.  03.         f  Fraser's  Magazine,  Oct.  1867. 


84  NATURAL    THEOLOG7'. 

may  seem)  seeds  are  the  provided  nutriment  for  liv- 
ing creatures.  We  also  know  that,  in  this  world  of 
ours,  no  power  is  lost ;  and  the  seeds  which  do  not 
rise  into  animated  beings  go  back  into  the  great 
ocean  of  life,  out  of  which  other  creatures  may  rise. 
All  analogy  leads  us  to  believe  that  there  is  not  an 
atom  or  germ  in  our  world  but  serves  some  purpose, 
whether  we  are  able  to  discover  it  or  not. 

Mr.  Wallace  maintains  that,  if  the  doctrine  of 
final  cause  holds  good,  "  there  ought  to  be  no  natural 
objects  w^hich  are  disagreeable  or  ungraceful  in  our 
eyes.  And  it  is  undoubtedly  the  fact  that  there  are 
many  such.  Just  as  surely  as  the  horse  and  deer 
are  beautiful  and  graceful,  the  elephant,  rhinoce- 
ros, hippopotamus  and  camel  are  the  reverse."* 
To  this  I  reply,  in  the  first  place,  that,  according 
to  the  principle  of  final  cause,  God  is  not  bound  to 
make  every  creature  beautiful.  He  has  scattered 
beauty  all  around  us,  in  earth  and  sky,  in  plant  and 
animal,  in  man  and  w^oman  ;  but  it  is  not  necessary 
for  our  happiness  and  comfort  that  he  should  impart 
to  every  object  qualities  which  are  fitted  to  raise 
excited  aesthetic  feeling.  For,  secondly,  it  is  not 
reckoned  the  highest  taste  to  have  every  part  of  a 
scene  characterized  by  sublimity  or  beauty.  In 
historical  painting,  the  grand  figures  are  made  to 
stand  out  from  plain  neutral  colors.  And,  once 
more,  God  contemplates,  in  all  his  works,  higher 
ends  than  the  gratification  of  aesthetic  taste ;  and 
we  are  not  to  expect  him  to  sacrifice  utility  to  grace 

*  Natural  Selection,  viii. 


OBJECTIONS    TO  FINAL    CAUSE.  85 

or  ornament.  To  apply  these  principles  to  only 
one  of  his  examples  :  No  one  would  say  that  the 
camel  is  as  beautiful  as  the  horse  or  the  deer ;  yet 
no  one  who  has  true  taste  will  say  that  it  is  ugly. 
The  camel  is  an  object  of  interest  to  every  thinking 
mind,  and  has  even  a  sort  of  beauty,  as  it  is  seen 
performing  its  beneficent  ends  in  its  native  clime. 
It  has  been  shown  that  what  may  seem  to  be  de- 
formities enable  it  the  better  to  fulfil  the  good  ends 
of  its  existence.  The  enlargement  of  its  feet,  with 
their  convex  soles,  allows  it  to  tread  easily  on  the 
loose  yielding  sand  of  the  desert ;  and  the  callosi- 
ties, or  pads,  upon  its  legs  allow  it  to  lie  down  and 
repose  on  scorching  surfaces.  And  these  humps 
are  supplies  of  superabundant  nourishment  provided 
for  their  long  journeys  :  so  that,  when  deprived  of 
other  food,  their  frames  feed  on  this  nutriment; 
and  it  has  been  observed  that,  at  the  close  of  a  long 
journey,  their  humps  have  been  much  diminished 
in  size.  Every  organ  has  thus  a  purpose,  though 
that  may  not  be  the  production  of  beauty. 

Mr.  Spencer  appeals  to  a  profounder  series  of 
facts,  w^hich  seem  to  show  that  there  are  provisions 
in  nature  which  seem  to  produce  evil,  instead  of 
good.  "  Still  more  marked  is  this  contrast  between 
the  two  hypotheses,  in  presence  of  that  vast  amount 
of  suffering  entailed  on  all  orders  of  sentient  beings 
by  their  imperfect  adaptations  to  their  conditions 
of  life,  and  the  further  vast  amount  of  sufTering 
entailed  on  them  by  enemies  and  by  parasites.  We 
saw  that,  if  the  organisms  were  severally  designed 


86  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

for  their  respective  places  in  nature,  the  inevita- 
ble conclusion  is,  that  these  thousands  of  kinds 
of  inferior  organisms,  which  prey  upon  superior 
organisms,  were  intended  to  inflict  all  the  pain 
and  mortality  which  results.  But  the  hypothesis 
of  evolution  involves  us  in  no  such  dilemma. 
Slowly,  but  surely,  evolution  brings  about  an  in- 
creasing amount  of  happiness,  all  evils  being 
incidental."*  I  acknowledge  that  Mr.  Spencer  has 
here  come  in  sight  of  a  mystery,  which  our  mere 
academic  theists  are  unwilling  to  look  at,  —  the 
profound  mystery  of  the  existence  of  pain  and  evil 
in  our  world.  It  brings  us  back  to  that  old  contest 
which,  we  have  seen,  has  characterized  our  world 
from  the  beginning.  Religion  cannot  dispel  that 
cloud,  but  it  so  far  irradiates  it.  These  groan- 
ings  and  travailings  of  the  old  world  seem  but  an 
anticipation  of  the  grand  battle  between  ignorance 
and  light,  between  sin  and  salvation,  in  the  pres- 
ent era  of  our  earth's  history. f  We  who  have  risen 
to  a  belief  in  the  existence  and  in  the  benevolence 
of  God  can  cherish  the  reasonable  conviction  that 
"  what  we  know  not  now  we  shall  know  hereafter  ;  " 

*  Principles  of  Biologj,  P.  iii.  3. 

t  In  answering  a  like  objection  brought  bj  Mr.  Lewes,  I  find 
the  thoughtful  comparative  anatomist  of  the  age,  Professor 
Owen,  remarking:  "True  it  is,  this  is  a  world  of  pain  as  well  as 
of  pleasure,  wherein  I  mav  ask  Positivism  leave  to  say,  '  God 
works  hy  means.'  Patience,  endurance,  faith  in  the  end  designed, 
a  nature  purified  as  bj  fire,  accepting  the  trial  with  thanks- 
giving, —  these  be  facts  visible  amongst  the  higher  recognizable 
phenomena  offered  to  our  pondering  here  below."  —  Eraser's 
Magazine,  Oct.  1867. 


OBJECTIONS    TO  FINAL    CAUSE.  87 

that  there  has  been  all  along  goodness  in  what 
has  occurred ;  and  that  the  good  shall  at  last  utterly 
destroy  the  evil.  But  what  can  they  make  of  it 
who  believe  in  no  God,  and  who  can  see  no  trace 
of  his  goodness  in  nature?  What  can  they  make 
of  those  convulsions  of  nature  which  have  swept 
away  so  many  animated  creatures,  so  manj^  human 
beings  apparently  in  the  midst  of  torture,  —  though, 
in  the  case  of  the  lower  animals,  with  less  pain 
than  we  suppose?  What  are  they  to  make  of  pain 
and  sorrows  and  bereavements  when  they  come  upon 
themselves?  Not  only  can  they  see  no  meaning, 
they  have  no  ground  for  believing  that  there  is  a 
meaning.  They  come  they  know  not  whence  ;  they 
tend  they  know  not  whither.  There  is  no  Father's 
love  in  them  for  the  present,  and  where  they  may 
end  they  cannot  tell.  Mr.  Spencer  refers  us, 
as  if  to  comfort  us,  to  the  hypothesis  of  evolution  : 
"Slowly,  but  surely,  evolution  brings  about  an 
increasing  amount  of  happiness,  all  evils  being 
incidental."  Would  this  give  comfort  to  the  widow 
grieving  over  the  separation  from  a  husband,  to 
the  father  deprived  of  an  only  son,  to  the  tender 
woman  racked  for  years  with  pain?  Would  it 
compose  their  grief  to  tell  them  that,  fifty  millions 
of  years  hence,  things  by  rubbing  would  be  so 
adapted  to  each  other  that  there  might  be  no  more 
pain  or  sorrow  ;  being  obliged  to  add,  if  they  told 
the  whole  truth,  that  in  fifty  millions  more  the  whole 
race  of  animated  creatures  would  be,  slowly  but 
surely,  burnt  up   in  fire?     Would  they  not,  as  we 


88  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

urged  this  consolation,  say  in  repl}^ :  "Miserable 
comforters  are  ye  all !  — Ye  are  all  physicians  of  no 
value"?  I  do  believe  that  the  evolution  which  we 
actually  see  in  the  world  is  so  beneficently  arranged 
that  all  the  evils  are  incidental,  and  that  there  is  an 
ever-increasing  amount  of  happiness ;  but  it  is 
because  it  has  been  arranged  by  a  good  God. 
Without  this,  evolution  might  work  an  ever- 
increasing  amount  of  misery,  and  direst  evils  be 
the  direct  consequence.  Mr.  Spencer  is  ever 
telling  us,  in  his  usual  dogmatic  manner  and  his 
customary  generalizing  flights,  that  the  operation 
of  evolution  and  physical  law  must  be  beneficial. 
But  I  see  no  necessity  for  this :  I  can  find  no 
security  for  it.  If  the  powers  at  work  be  blind 
forces,  they  may  as  readily  produce  destruction  as 
beneficent  construction,  and  would  probably  pro- 
duce now  the  one  and  now  the  other.  True,  if 
they  be  modes  of  God's  action,  the  issue  must  be 
beneficent ;  for  there  is  intelligence  in  them  and 
benevolence  in  them. 

It  thus  appears,  as  the  result  of  our  lengthened 
induction,  that  in  the  midst  of  the  potencies  of 
nature  there  is  a  Divine  power  controlling  and  guid- 
ing them  to  ends  ;  and  bringing  order,  I  do  not  say 
out  of  confusion,  for  there  is  no  proof  that  there 
ever  was  confusion  in  God's  universe,  —  chaos  is  a 
creation  of  heathenism,  and  was  never  seen  in  the 
actual  world, — but  producing  order  where  there 
might  have  been  confusion,  and  making  a  Cosmos 
where  there  might  liave  been  a  chaos. 


APPEARANCE  OF  NE  W  A  GENCIES,  89 

(2.)  There  is  the  appearance  ever  and  anon  of 
New  Agencies.  We  may  allow  that  there  were  me- 
chanical, gravitating,  and  it  may  be  chemical  prop- 
erties in  the  original  star  dust.  But,  superinduced 
on  these,  there  are  new  powers.  Life  appears  ;  plants 
appear ;  animals  appear  ;  new  species  of  plants  and 
animals  appear ;  and  man  appears  with  his  high 
capacities.  It  is  easy  for  flippant  minds  to  talk  of 
all  this  being  effected  by  natural  forces ;  but  the 
forces  which  could  accomplish  this -have  not  yet 
been  exposed  to  our  view.  It  may  seem  profound 
wisdom  to  represent  all  this  as  produced  by  develop- 
ment, but  development  of  itself  implies  a  complex 
process  of  which  we  do  not  know  the  elements.  The 
chemist  cannot  produce  one  of  these  agents  in  his 
laboratory,  except  out  of  agents  already  possessing 
them  ;  and  the  widest  observation  in  space  and  time 
has  not  detected  nature  accomplishing  any  such 
feat.  The  truly  scientific  man  will  not  dogmatize  as 
to  how  these  agents  were  introduced,  for  he  has  no 
light  from  observation  to  guide  him.  The  religious 
man,  as  he  has  no  revelation  to  instruct  him,  has  no 
right  to  say  they  are  the  result  of  a  special  fiat  or 
of  the  arrangement  of  old  materials,  except  indeed 
in  the  case  of  man,  whose  soul  was  breathed  into 
him  by  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty.  That  there 
has  been  law  —  that  is,  order  —  in  the  appearance 
of  these  new  agents  is  very  evident ;  but  what  were 
the  means,  if  means  there  were,  is  unknown  to  us. 
Let  us  not  assert  where  we  have  no  evidence.  But 
let  us  declare,  for  we  have  evidence,  that  God  is 


90  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

to  be  seen  in  these  new  appearances,  whether  we 
trace  them  to  an  immediate  creation  or  a  preordained 
arrangement. 

(3.)  There  is  proof  of  Plan  in  the  Organic  Unity 
and  Growth  of  the  World.  As  there  is  evidence  of 
purpose,  not  only  in  every  organ  of  the  plant,  but 
in  the  whole  plant ;  not  only  in  every  limb  of  the 
animal,  but  in  the  whole  animal  frame,  and  in  the 
growth  of  both  plant  and  animal  from  month  to 
month  and  year  to  year :  so  there  are  proofs  of 
design,  not  merely  in  the  individual  plant  and  indi- 
vidual animal,  but  in  the  whole  structure  of  the 
Cosmos  and  in  the  manner  in  which  it  makes  prog- 
ress from  age  to  age.  Every  reflecdng  mind,  in 
tracing  the  development  of  the  plant  or  animal,  will 
see  a  design  and  a  unity  of  design  in  it,  in  the 
unconscious  elements  being  all  made  to  conspire  to 
a  given  end,  in  the  frame  of  the  animated  being 
taking  a  predetermined  form ;  so  every  one  trained 
in  the  great  truths  of  advanced  science  should  see 
a  contemplated  purpose  in  the  way  in  which  the 
materials  and  forces  and  life  of  the  universe  are 
made  to  conspire,  to  secure  a  progress  through  inde- 
terminate ages.  The  persistence  of  force  may  be 
one  of  the  elements  conspiring  to  this  end  ;  the  law 
of  Natural  Selecdon  may  be  another,  or  it  may 
only  be  a  modification  of  the  same  :  all  and  each 
work  in  the  midst  of  a  struggle  for  existence,  in 
which  the  strong  prevail  and  the  weak  disappear. 
But  in  all  this  there  is  a  starting  point  and  a  ter- 
minus, and  rails  along  which  the  powers   run,   and 


UNITY  OF  THE   WORLD.  91 

an  intelligence  planning  and  guiding  the  whole, 
and  bringing  it  to  its  destination  freighted  with 
blessings. 

The  accomplishment  of  all  this  implies  arrange- 
ment and  co-agency.  There  are  order  and  pro- 
gression, we  have  seen,  in  the  physical  works  of 
God  :  this  is  said,  in  modern  nomenclature,  to  be  a 
law.  A  law  of  what?  Is  it  a  law  in  the  Divine 
mind?  Yes  :  it  is  a  law  there  before  it  appears  as  a 
law  in  nature.  It  is  a  rule  of  the  Divine  procedure. 
But  is  it  not  also  a  law  of  nature  ?  It  certainly  is 
so  in  the  loose  acceptation  of  the  word  lazv  now 
adopted.  But  in  what  sense?  Certainly  not  in  the 
sense  of  a  simple,  self-acting  property,  but  in  a 
widely  different  sense,  —  in  the  sense  of  a  generalized 
fact  or  co-ordination  of  facts.*  But  all  such  laws 
are  complex  :  they  result  from  the  co-ordination  and 

*  Dr.  Chalmers  drew  the  distinction  between  the  Laws  of 
Matter  and  the  Collocations  of  Matter,  and  drew  the  argument 
from  design  chiefly  from  the  Collocations  of  Matter.  I  have 
shown  that  in  General  Laws  collocations,  or  mutual  adaptations, 
are  always  implied.  "  So  far  from  general  laws  being  able,  as 
superficial  thinkers  imagine,  to  produce  the  beautiful  adaptations 
which  are  so  numerous  in  nature,  they  are  themselves  the  results 
of  nicely  balanced  and  skilful  adjustments.  So  far  from  being 
simple,  they  are  the  product  of  many  arrangements;  just  as  the 
hum  which  comes  from  a  city,  and  which  may  seem  a  simple 
sound,  is  the  joint  effect  of  many  blended  voices;  just  as  the 
musical  note  is  the  effect  of  numerous  vibrations ;  as  the  curi- 
ous circular  atoll-reefs  met  with  in  the  South  Seas  are  the 
product  of  millions  of  insects.  So  far  from  being  independ- 
ent principles,  they  are  dependent  on  many  other  principles. 
They  are  not  agencies,  but  ends  contemplated  by  Him  who 
adjusted  the  physical  agencies  which  produced  them.     As  such, 


92  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

adaptation  of  an  immense  body  of  agencies,  just  as 
the  keeping  of  time  by  the  chronometer  results  from 
an  assortment  of  divers  instruments,  such  as  the 
mainspring  and  attached  machinery.  The  revolu- 
tion, for  instance,  of  the  earth  round  the  sun  is  not 
a  property  either  of  the  earth  or  of  the  sun,  but  of 
a  combination  of  a  centripetal  and  centrifugal  force, 
and  of  the  relation  of  the  two  bodies  to  each  other. 
The  law  followed  by  the  plant  when  it  springs  from 
the  seed,  grows  and  bears  seed,  is  still  more  com- 
plex, employing  a  greater  number  of  powers  and 
adaptations  of  particles  one  to  another,  and  of  grav- 
itating, chemical,  electric,  and  vital  agents.  But 
the  law  of  the  progression  of  all  plants  and  of  all 
animals  is  a  still  more  complex  one,  implying 
adjustment  upon  adjustment  of  all  the  elements  and 
all  the  powers  of  nature  towards  the  accomplish- 
ment of  an  evidently  contemplated  end,  in  which  are 
displayed  the  highest  wisdom  and  the  most  consid- 
erate goodness. 

(4.)  We  see  Higher  and  Higher  Products  appear- 
ing, and  manifesting  higher  perfections  of  God. 
The  blind  Forces  are  made  to  work  out  Ideas 
in  the  Platonic  Sense.  The  Mundus  Sensibilis 
becomes  a  Mundus  Intelligibilis,  taking  forms  with 
geometric  proportions  and  of  aesthetic  beauty,  and 
clothed   with    melodious    and    harmonious    colors. 

they  become  the  rules  of  God's  house,  the  laws  of  his  king- 
dom;  and  wherever  we  see  such  laws,  there  we  see  the  certain 
traces  of  a  law-giver."  —  Method  of  Divine  Govenunent,  B.  11. 
c.  i.  §  3. 


HIGHER  PRODUCTS  APPEARING.  93 

Sensation  and  feeling  now  appear ;  and  there  is  a 
wonderful  structure  and  adaptation  of  limb  and 
joint  and  nerve  to  furnish  means  of  activity  and  of 
enjoyment,  which  in  the  whole  animal  creation 
become  great  beyond  calculation.  We  now  see 
that  this  intelligent  is  also  a  benevolent  power. 
Crowning  all,  we  have  Mind  and  the  Law  written 
in  the  heart,  and  declaring  that  right  is  above 
might ;  and  we  have  the  good  advancing  in  the 
midst  of  opposition,  and  in  the  face  of  opposition, 
asserting  that  it  will  at  last  subdue  all  to  itself,  and 
rule  in  the  name  of  God.  And  we  now  see  what 
God  reckons  the  highest  of  all,  —  higher  than  order, 
higher  than  intelligence,  higher  than  sensation ; 
and  this  is  hoHness,  —  a  holiness  not  independent 
of  intelligence,  but  a  holy  intelligence ;  not  inde- 
pendent of  love,  but  a  holy  love.  God  is  the  same 
in  all  time  ;  but,  as  the  ages  roll  on,  they  unfold 
higher  and  ever  higher  perfections.  These  three  — 
the  Power,  the  Intelligence,  the  Benevolence  —  are 
seen  combining  to  form  the  pure  white  light  of 
holy  love.  "  God  is  a  Spirit,"  "  God  is  Light,"  and 
"  God  is  Love."  These  are  the  stars  which  have 
emerged  from  the  star  dust  to  form  One  Grand 
Central  Sun  of  pure  and  dazzHng  brightness,  which 
we  cannot  open  our  eyes  without  seeing,  but  which, 
as  we  would  gaze  upon  it,  causes  them  to  close  in 
awe  and  adoration. 

(5.)  The  journey  we  have  taken,  and  the  height 
we  have  reached,  open  glimpses  of  the  Future  His- 
tory of  our  World.     We  see  everywhere  signs  of 


94  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

progress.  There  is  progress  \w  agriculture,  there 
is  progress  in  the  arts,  there  is  progress  in  all  the 
sciences ;  man's  dominion  over  nature  is  rapidly 
increasing,  and  the  earth,  every  succeeding  year, 
is  made  to  yield  a  greater  produce.  The  fruit  of 
the  discoveries  of  one  age  contains  the  germ  of  the 
discoveries  of  the  generation  following ;  and  the 
new  plant  springs  alongside  of  the  old  one  to  scat- 
ter seed  like  its  progenitor  all  around.  No  valuable 
invention  of  human  genius  is  ever  lost ;  and  most 
of  them  become  the  means  of  multiplying  them- 
selves by  a  greater  than  compound  proportion, 
and  thus  render  each  generation  richer  than  the 
one  that  went  before.  The  wealth  of  all  preced- 
ing generations  is  thus  to  be  poured  into  the  lap 
of  the  generations  that  are  to  live  in  the  coming 
ages  of  our  world's  history.  The  struggle  for 
existence  still  goes  on ;  but  there  is  evidence 
that  the  intellectual  is  to  show  itself  stronger  than 
the  physical  and  the  moral,  always  under  the 
government  of  God,  stronger  than  either.  For 
the  present,  we  see  the  serpent  biting  the  heel 
of  the  seed  of  the  woman  :  but  the  age  of  serpents, 
with  their  crushing  force  and  their  cunning,  is  to 
pass  away ;  and  we  see  proof  that  the  woman's 
heaven-born  seed  is  to  crush  the  head  of  the  ser- 
pent; and,  as  Plato  forecast  it,  the  good  shall  be 
the  uppermost,  and  the  evil  the  undermost,  for 
evermore. 

I  do  not  knov/  whether  any  of  my  hearers   have 
ever  gone  up  from  Riffelberg  to  Gorner  Grat,  in  the 


FUTURE  OF  THE   WORLD.  95 

High  Alps,  to  behold  the  sun  rise.     Every  moun- 
tain catches  the  light  according  to  the  height  which 
the  upheaving  forces  that  God  set  in  motion  have 
given  it.     First  the  point  of  Monte  Rosa  is  kissed 
by  the  morning  beams,  blushes  for  a  moment,  and 
forthwith    stands    clear    in    the    light.       Then    the 
Breithorn  and  the  dome  of  Muschabel  and  the  Mat- 
terhorn,  and  twenty  other  grand  mountains,  embrac- 
ing  the    distant   Jung    Frau,    receive    each    in    its 
turn   the   gladdening   rays,  bask   each  for  a  brief 
space,  and  then  remain  bathed  in  sunlight.     Mean- 
while, the  valleys  between   lie  down  dark  and  dis- 
mal as  death.     But  the  light  which  has  risen  is  the 
light  of  the  morning ;   and  these  shadows  are  even 
now   lessening,    and   we    are    sure    they   will    soon 
altogether   vanish.      Such    is    the    hopeful    view    I 
take  of  our  world.     "Darkness  covered  the  earth, 
and  gross  darkness   the  people  ;  "  but   God's  light 
hath  broken  forth  as  the  mornins^,  and  to  them  who 
sat  in  darkness  a  great  light  has  arisen.     Already 
I  see  favored  spots  illuminated  by  it :   Great  Britain 
and  her  spreading  colonies  ;  and  Prussia,  extend- 
ing her  influence  ;  and  the  United  States,  with  her 
broad  territory  and  her  rapidly  increasing  popula- 
tion,—  stand  in  the  light ;  and  I  see,  not  twenty,  but 
a  hundred  points  of  light,  striking  up  in  our  scat- 
tered   mission    stations,  —  in    old    continents    and 
secluded    isles    and    barren    deserts,    according    as 
God's  grace  and  man's   heaven-kindled   love  have 
favored   them.      And    much   as   I   was    enraptured 
with  that  grand  Alpine  scene,  and  shouted  irrepres- 


96  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

sibly  as  I  surveyed  it,  I  am  still  more  elevated,  and 
I  feel  as  if  I  could  cry  aloud  for  joy,  when  I  hear 
of  the  light  advancing  from  point  to  point,  and 
penetrating  deeper  and  deeper  into  the  darkness 
which,  we  are  sure,  is  at  last  to  be  dispelled,  to 
allow  our  earth  to  stand  clear  in  the  light  of  the 
Sun  of  Righteousness. 


IV. 


Proof  of  the  Existence  of  Mind  and  of  its  possessing 
THE  Capacity  of  Knowledge.  —  Doctrines  of  Nes- 
cience AND  Relativity. 

THROUGHOUT  the  previous  discussions  I 
have  been  constantly  obliged  to  employ  or  to 
refer  to  philosophic  principles.  In  the  full  exposi- 
tion of  the  argument,  it  will  be  necessary  to  con- 
sider these,  as  well  as  the  physical  facts,  that  the 
defence  may  be  complete  throughout.  But  this 
implies  that  we  take  a  look  at  the  soul  of  man. 
Not  that  we  are  to  examine  the  mind  in  its  entirety ; 
not  that  we  are  to  dissect  it  metaphysically  :  we 
are  to  view  it  simply  in  its  relation  to  God  and  to 
religion.  Some  of  the  discussions  on  which  I  am 
to  enter  may  seem  a  little  too  recondite;  but  all  of 
them  bear  upon  the  prevailing  errors  of  the  day. 
I  profess  to  keep  a  sharp  outlook  on  the  current  of 
opinion  all  over  the  world,  especially  among  young 
men.  I  am  ever  asking  the  watchman,  "What  of 
the  night?"  and,  in  these  Lectures,  I  take  up  the 
topics  of  the  day ;  but  it  would  be  better  not  to  dis- 
cuss them  at  all  than  not  discuss  them  thoroughly. 
In  coming  Lectures,  I  will  start  from  the  positions 

s 


98  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

reached  in  this  to  examine  Positivism  and  Material- 
ism,—  the  doctrines  likely  to  flourish  for  a  season 
among  the  young  men  who  catch  the  spirit  of  the 
age  in  its  latest  fashion. 

Those  whom  I  am  opposing  constitute  a  school 
with  a  diversity  of  teachers.  Though,  as  a  whole, 
they  are  men  of  narrow  sympathies  and  an  exclusive 
temper,  and  can  discern  only  a  small  segment  of 
the  wide  and  profound  meaning  of  the  universe, — 
are,  in  fact,  not  catholic  nor  cosmopolitan,  but  in- 
tensely sectarian  in  their  spirit,  — yet  they  cultivate 
with  zeal  and  ability  a  number  of  branches  of 
knowledge.  Their  physiology  is  associated  with  a 
psychology  and  a  philosophy,  and,  I  may  add,  a 
method  of  history.  They  have  men  of  eminence 
in  each  of  these  departments ;  and  each  in  his  way 
joins  with  others  in  their  way  in  furthering  a  com- 
mon cause  and  fostering  a  common  belief,  or  rather 
unbelief.  They  have  some  of  the  literary  and 
scientific  institutions  of  Great  Britain  very  much  in 
their  own  hands,  and  are  seeking  to  find  a  place  in 
others.  They  are  laboring  to  lay  hold  of  young 
men  connected  with  the  press,  and  have  been 
specially  successful  with  two  classes :  with  those 
who  would  like  to  be  thought  philosophers,  but  who 
have  no  time  nor  taste  for  the  study  of  a  deeper 
philosophy ;  and  with  those  who,  in  a  feeling  of 
disappointment,  have  been  obliged  to  turn  aside 
from  their  intended  professions  in  life  —  most  com- 
monly the  church  —  to  engage  in  literary  pursuits. 
They  have  a  body  of  adherents  eager  to  propagate 


AIM  OF  THE  POSITIVE   SCHOOL. 


99 


their  system,  and  ever  ready  to  make  an  assault  on 
all  who  would  inculcate  a  philosophy  of  a  higher 
and   more  spiritual  character. 

There  is  a  unity  in  their  system  and  in  their  ends. 
They  aim  at  accounting  for  the  Vv^hole  of  nature 
by  development  out  of  they  know  not  what.  They 
derive  man  from  the  brutes,  and  make  him  merely 
an  upper  brute.  They  do  not  deny  the  existence 
of  the  soul ;  but  they  identify  it  with  the  body.  All 
the  higher  ideas  of  man  they  manufacture,  by 
means  of  association  of  ideas,  out  of  impressions  got 
by  the  senses  and  an  inward  sentient  experience, 
and  by  development  from  the  lower  races  of  hu- 
manity and  the  ancestral  animals  through  millions 
of  ages.  History  is  a  mere  evolution  of  natural 
causes,  working  without  any  discoverable  meaning 
or  end.  The  lower  animals  and  the  plants  come 
out  of  the  protoplasm,  and  the  protoplasm  out  of 
the  star  dust,  and  the  star  dust  out  of  they  know 
not  what,  — out  of  what  never  can  be  known,  and 
about  which,  therefore,  it  is  unphilosophical  to 
inquire.  They  all  agree  that  of  the  nature  and 
reality  of  things  we  know  nothing,  and  can  know 
nothing.  All  that  we  know  is  represented  as 
Relative;  that  is,  we  can  know  any  one  thing 
merely  in  relation  to  some  other  one  thing,  itself 
unknown.  They  are  determinedly  agreed  that  we 
can  discover  no  indications  of  first  or  final  causes  ; 
that  the  supernatural,  if  there  be  a  supernatural, 
must  lie  in  a  region  beyond  human  ken ;  and  that 
religion  has  no  title  to  excite  a  fear  or  kindle  a 


lOO  NATURAL    THEOLOG7'. 

hope.  A  young  friend  of  mine,  who  had  to  sit 
from  day  to  day,  through  a  college  session,  under 
a  distinguished  professor  belonging  to  this  school, 
told  me  that,  at  the  close  of  every  lecture,  he  had 
to  debate  with  himself  the  question  :  "  Have  or  have 
I  not  a  soul?  "  "  Am  I  a  reality?  "  or,  ''  Is  there  any 
reality?"  As  having  to  withstand  the  assaults  of 
these  men  who  profess  to  go  down  so  deep,  we 
must  see  that  our  foundations  are  well  laid. 

I.  And  so  the  qjjestion   is  started,    What 

PROOF    HAVE    ^VE     OF     THE    EXISTENCE     OF     MiND? 

It  is  necessary  to  take  up  such  an  elementary  ques- 
tion as  this  in  our  day,  to  meet  the  advancing 
materialism  which  is  springing  out  of  the  decay 
(as  they  suppose)  of  all  old  creeds,  philosophical 
and  theological.  A  materialism,  refined,  ^esthetical, 
but  sensualistic,  has  been  the  reigning  philosophy 
(if  philosophy  it  can  be  called)  in  France,  under 
that  repression  of  free  thought,  ever  bursting  out 
in  secret  license,  which  characterized  the  regime 
of  Louis  Napoleon.  It  has  considerable  power 
among  physicists  in  Germany;  being  the  hollow, 
in  this  age,  on  the  back  of  the  height  which  think- 
ers occupied  in  the  last  age  (it  is,  in  fact,  the  bog 
into  which  the  will-a-wisp  Hegelianism  has  con- 
ducted not  a  few  of  those  who  followed  it) ,  —  my 
hope  is  that  it  will  be  so  far  counteracted  by  the 
glorious  outburst  of  patriotism  w^hich  the  present 
war  has  called  forth,  and  which  has  been  fond  of 
recognizing  a  providence.  It  is  the  issue  —  whether 
they  see  it  or  no,  whether  they  mean  it  or  no  —  to 


WB  KNOW  SELF  IMMEDIATELT.  lOI 

which  Mill's  association  theory,  and  Bain's  identifi- 
cation of  all  our  thoughts  and  feelings  with  the 
body,  and  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer's  development  of 
all  thincfs  out  of  an  unknowable  nothincr,  and  Hux- 
ley's  physical  basis  of  life  and  mind  in  molecular 
action,  are  severally  and  conjointly  conducting  the 
young  thinkers  of  Great  Britain.  The  sun  rises 
some  hours  later  in  America  than  in  Europe  ;  and 
doctrines  which  have  sprung  up  in  Deutschland, 
and  come  across  to  England,  like  a  fog  from  the 
German  Ocean,  take  some  little  time  to  cross  the 
Atlantic ;  but  already  we  see  proof  that  we  are  on 
the  eve  of  a  conflict  with  a  physico-philosophy, 
which  would  account  for  all  mental  action  and  ideas 
by  molecular  motion,  or  some  form  of  material 
agency.  To  meet  it,  we  lay  down  a  few  simple 
positions. 

I .  Man  has  means  of  knowing  the  existence  of 
fnind  as  immediate  as  the  means  of  knozuing  the 
existence  of  matter,  —  It  is  necessary  to  make  this 
remark,  because  it  is  often  said  that  man  can  know 
directly  only  his  own  bodily  frame  and  the  objects 
falling  under  his  senses,  and  can  arrive  at  the 
knowledge  of  mind  —  if,  indeed,  there  be  a  mind, 
and  if  he  can  come  to  be  certain  of  its  existence  — 
only  by  a  circuitous  process.  It  is  supposed  that  he 
comes  first  to  know  the  existence  of  his  material 
organism  ;  and  that,  proceeding  upon  this,  he  con- 
cludes that  there  is  or  may  be  a  spiritual  principle, 
as  it  were  lying  deeper  in  than  the  visible  and 
tangible  frame.     According  to  this  view,  our  knowl- 


I02  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

edge  of  the  existence  ot'  mind  is  reached  b}'  a 
process  of  inference,  and  there  are  persons  who 
dispute  its  legitimacy.  They  tell  us  that,  as  physi- 
ology is  advancing  in  its  researches,  mind  is  retiring 
farther  and  farther  back  ;  and  not  a  few  are  cherish- 
ing the  expectation  that,  in  the  course  of  time,  they 
may  be  delivered  from  it  altogether ;  and  that  they 
may  account  for  ever}^  exercise  of  thought  and  feel- 
ing by  mechanical  and  chemical  processes,  by  elec- 
tric and  nervous  agency.  Now,  I  meet  all  these 
objections  by  denying  that  it  is  by  any  such  length- 
ened or  circuitous  process  that  we  come  to  discover 
the  existence  of  mind.  I  afErm  that  we  know  mind, 
just  as  we  know  matter,  directly  and  immediately. 
We  can,  in  a  sense,  experiment  upon  the  mind, 
in  order  to  discover  its  working.  We  set  out  from 
our  dwelling  into  the  heart  of  a  pleasant  scene  of 
hills  and  vales,  and  trees  and  streams.  It  is  not 
by  a  perplexing  process  of  reasoning  that  we  believe 
this  oak  and  that  rock  to  exist :  we  have  an  intui- 
tive and  immediate  knowledge  of  them  by  the 
senses.  While  we  look  at  these  objects,  we  are 
conscious  that  we  do  so  ;  we  are  conscious,  intui- 
tively and  immediately  conscious,  of  a  self  different 
from  the  scene  we  are  contemplating.  While  we 
behold  the  objects,  we  are  led  to  form  certain  judg- 
ments regarding  them  :  this  hill  is  higher  than  this 
other  hill ;  this  tree  is  a  pine  and  this  other  a  maple  ; 
this  stream  is  pure  and  flowing  rapidly.  While  we 
thus  judge  and  reason  about  these  objects,  we  are 
conscious  of  a  self  that  is  doing  so.     While  we  are 


CONSCIOCrSNBSS    OF  SELF.  103 

enjo3'ing  the  scene,  we  see  a  company  of  children 
playing  on  the  bank  of  the  river,  and  they  seem  so 
happy  that  we  rejoice  in  their  joy,  and  are  as  con- 
scious of  our  joy  as  we  are  of  their  existence.  But, 
unexpectedly,  two  of  the  boys  begin  to  quarrel ;  and 
the  stronger  knocks  the  other  into  the  water,  and 
the  stream  is  bearing  him  along,  apparently,  to 
destruction.  We  are  forthwith  filled  with  horror 
and  indignation  at  the  deed ;  we  feel  ourselves 
reprobating  the  conduct  of  the  violent  youth ;  and, 
feeling  pity  for  the  boy  who  is  sinking  in  the  waters, 
we  rush  into  the  stream  in  the  hope  of  rescuing 
him.  We  are  as  certain  that  there  is  a  something 
perceiving  the  scene,  as  that  there  is  a  scene  per- 
ceived ;  that  there  is  a  mind  comparing  the  hills, 
trees,  and  streams,  as  that  there  are  hills,  trees, 
and  streams  to  be  compared  ;  that  there  is  a  soul 
reprobating  the  passionate  boy,  as  that  there  is  a 
boy  to  be  reprobated ;  that  we  have  not  more  con- 
vincing evidence  that  there  is  a  boy  drowning  in 
the  river,  than  we  have  of  the  other  fact  that  we  are 
cherishing  compassion  towards  him  ;  and  we  are 
not  more  assured  that  the  child  is  in  danger,  than 
we  are  that  we  have  resolved  to  rescue  him.  And 
let  us  observe,  carefully,  how  much  is  implied  in 
what  we  have  thus  felt  as  passing  through  our  minds  : 
we  are  conscious  of  a  self  performing  a  great  num- 
ber and  variety  of  acts,  as  perceiving,  judging, 
reasoning,  distinguishing  between  good  and  evil, 
as  under  the  influence  of  deep  emotion,  as  willing 
and  fulfilling  our   determinations.     It  follows:  — 


I04  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

2.  That  we  have  a  -positive  though  limited 
knowledge  of  77iiiid^  even  as  we  have  a  -positive 
though  limited  knowledge  of  body.  There  are 
eminent  metaphysicians,  among  whom  we  may 
reckon  Kant,  who  maintain  that  we  can  know 
nothing  of  matter,  except  that  it  exists  :  matter  is 
described  as  the  unknown  something  producing  the 
impressions  which  we  feel  in  our  minds.  Now, 
with  all  deference  to  the  distinguished  men  who 
have  held  this  dogma,  I  believe  it  to  be  utterly 
inconsistent  with  the  intuitive  declarations  of  con- 
sciousness. Man  is  possessed  of  a  power  or  attri- 
bute, by  which  he  knows,  I  believe,  immediately, 
the  objects  by  which  he  is  surrounded.  He  knows 
matter  as  extended  in  length,  breadth,  and  depth, 
and  as  exercising  certain  active  properties,  as  mov- 
ing or  striking  other  objects,  or  as  being  repelled. 
In  all  this,  it  is  true,  he  is  far  from  knowing  all 
about  matter :  matter  may  have  properties  which 
are  latent,  —  latent,  inasmuch  as  we  have  never 
seen  them  exercised;  or  latent,- inasmuch  as  we 
may  never  be  able  to  discover  them ;  but  still  he 
has  a  knowledge,  limited,  no  doubt,  but  positive 
and  trustworthy  so  far  as  it  goes.  I  have  referred 
to  this  error  at  the  one  extreme,  only  that  I  may  be 
able  the  better*  to  expose  an  error  at  the  other 
extreme.  A  living  writer  says  that  the  only  method 
by  which  mind  can  be  defined  as  a  substance  is, 
"by  taking  the  realities  of  which  we  have  expe- 
rience, and  abstracting  one  property  after  another, 
until   we   have   an    entity   without  extension,   with- 


WB  HAVE  A   KNOWLEDGE    OF  MIND. 


105 


out  resistance,  without  parts,  without  divisibihty," 
&c.  Now,  it  appears  to  me,  we  might  with  as  much 
propriety  declare  that  we  could  not  define  matter 
except  as  an  entity,  without  consciousness,  without 
thought,  without  will.  Just  as  we  define  matter 
by  positives  as  extended,  as  possessed  of  attrac- 
tion and  other  properties ;  so  we  may  define  mind 
by  positive  qualities,  all  of  them  known  to  us, 
because  we  have  constant  experience  of  them. 
We  may  define  it  as  possessing  consciousness, 
intelligence,  conscience,  emotion,  will.  The  fact 
is,  that,  being  immediately  conscious  of  mind  and 
its  varied  actings  from  hour  to  hour,  and  minute 
to  minute,  we  know  more  of  mind  than  we  know 
of  matter.  True,  we  do  not  possess  a  perfect  knowl- 
edge of  man's  mental,  any  more  than  of  his  corpo- 
real, nature.  We  do  not  know  and  cannot  be 
expected  to  know  it,  as  the  God  who  made  it 
knows  it:  still  we  have  in  consciousness  a  means, 
and  this  an  immediate  means,  of  knowing  so  much 
of  its  nature  and  properties,  as  thinking,  feeling, 
desiring,  willing. 

3.  As  matter  cannot  be  resolved  into  mind  on  the 
one  hand,  so  mind  cannot  he  resolved  into  matter 
on  the  other.  There  have  been  attempts  made  by 
ingenious  metaphysicians,  as  by  Bishop  Berkeley 
and  by  Fichte,  so  to  refine  matter  as  to  leave  little 
but  the  name :  it  is  represented  either  as  an  idea 
created  by  the  Divine  Mind,  to  be  viewed  by  the 
created  mind,  or  as  a  projection  of  the  human 
mind   itself.     There  is  also   a    school    of  physical 

5* 


I06  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

speculators  in  the  present  day,  who  are  seeking  to 
spiritualize  matter  by  stripping  it  of  some  of  its  dis- 
tinguishing properties,  such  as  its  extension  or  its 
occupation  of  space.  With  them  matter  is  merely 
a  name  for  certain  powers,  mechanical,  chemical, 
or  electric,  which  are  supposed  to  produce  all  the 
phenomena  falling  under  the  senses.  This  refined 
view  of  body,  though  supported  by  names  of  repute, 
seems  to  be  inconsistent  wdth  that  immediate  and 
intuitive  knowledge  which  we  possess  of  it,  as  not 
only  exercising  dynamical  powers,  but  as  extended 
and  solid.  But  while  opposing  all  attempts  to  resolve 
matter  into  mind,  I  would  also  set  myself  against 
the  attempt  to  resolve  mind  into  matter.  By  our 
primitive  cognitions,  we  know  matter  as  extended, 
solid,  divisible,  and  exercising  such  qualities  as 
attraction  and  repulsion ;  but  we  also  know  self  as 
perceiving,  judging,  reasoning,  devising,  hating, 
fearing,  loving. 

To  those  w^ho  would  aver  that  mind  may  be  merely 
a  modification  of  matter,  I  reply,  first ^  that  the  two 
are  made  known  to  us  by  different  organs  :  we  know 
the  one,  matter,  by  the  senses ;  we  know  the  other, 
mind,  by  self-consciousness.  No  man  ever  saw  a 
thought,  touched  an  emotion,  or  heard  a  volition. 
Nor  are  we  conscious,  within  the  thinking  mind,  of 
space  occupied,  or  hardness,  or  color.  We  reply, 
secondly^  and  more  particularly,  that  we  know  them 
as  possessed  of  essentially  different  properties  :  we 
know  the  one  as  occupying  space  and  exercising  cer- 
tain attractive  powers ;  whereas  we  know  the  other 


MIND  AND  BODY  DIFFERENT.  1 07 

as  capable  of  judgment,  purpose,  and  affection.  If 
any  one  will  maintain  that,  notwithstanding  these 
differences,  the  two  can  be  reduced  to  one,  the  bur- 
den of  proof  lies  upon  him.  And  I  have  never 
found  the  materialist  advancing  any  evidence  which 
can  stand  a  sifting  scrutiny.  He  has  not  demon- 
strated, and  I  believe  it  is  impossible  for  him  to 
demonstrate,  that  any  modification  of  mere  matter — 
be  it  electric,  nervous,  or  whatever  else  —  can  yield 
those  peculiar  phenomena  of  which  we  are  con- 
scious in  the  thinking  and  feeling  mind  ;  can  give 
intelligence  and  choice,  and  the  perception  of  the 
distinction  between  good  and  evil ;  or  those  lofty 
aff'ections  and  heroic  resolutions  which  constitute  the 
noblest  characteristics  of  humanity. 

I  have  never  found  those  materialists  who  profess 
to  explain  mental  action  by  material  forces  so  much 
as  having  a  clear  idea  of  the  thing  to  be  explained. 
The  physiologist  may,  by  the  study  of  the  nerves 
and  brain,  come  to  know  what  the  nerves  and  brain 
are,  and  has  shown  that  they  are  soft,  pulpy  sub- 
stances, with  a  certain  chemical  composition.  He 
has  tried  to  show  that  electricity  will  explain  all  the 
properties  of  the  nerves,  and  in  this  he  has  hitherto 
been  unsuccessful ;  for  while  electricity  travels  along 
a  tied  nerve,  the  nervous  fluid  does  not.  But  though 
he  should  be  successful,  he  would  not  thereby  en- 
lighten us  on  the  subject  of  intellect  or  volition  : 
he  might  show  under  what  physiological  conditions 
they  arise,  but  would  not  thereby  throw  light  on  the 
intellect  and  volition   themselves.     Let  us  suppose 


I08  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

that  an  electric  force  runs  along  a  pulpy  substance, 
the  nerve,  till  it  reaches  another  pulpy  substance,  the 
brain,  still  we  have  not  thereby  explained  that  essen- 
tially different  phenomenon  which  we  call  thought, 
or  that  other  phenomenon  which  we  call  zvill.  An 
electric  force  is  one  thinor,  and  the  inijenious  thouo;ht 
of  Faraday  in  speculating  on  that  force  is  an  entirely 
different  thing.  An  affection  of  the  pulpy  substance, 
the  brain,  is  one  thing  ;  and  the  determination  of  the 
mind  to  resist  temptation,  the  determination  of  Jo- 
seph, for  example,  when  he  said,  "Can  I  do  this  great 
w^ickedness  and  sin  against  God?"  is  an  entirely 
different  thing.  To  confound  them  is  to  confound 
things  which,  so  far  from  being  the  same,  have  not 
even  a  common  point  of  resemblance.  The  physiol- 
ogist can  explain,  in  a  curious  manner  at  times,  how 
certain  thoughts  and  feelings  arise  ;  but  after  all  he 
has  left  the  essential  point  untouched :  he  has  not 
explained,  nay,  he  has  not  so  much  as  attempted  to 
explain,  thought  itself,  or  volition,  or  emotion. 

In  a  later  Lecture  we  must  subject  Materialism  to 
a  thorough  examination.  Meanwhile,  I  am  estab- 
lishing principles  as  a  preparation  for  reviewing  the 
prevalent  systems  of  the  day.  All  that  I  have  said 
has  been  allowed  clearly  and  unequivocally  by 
Professor  Tyndall.*  "The  passage  from  the  phys- 
ics of  the  brain  to  the  corresponding  facts  of  con- 
sciousness is  unthinkable.  Granted  that  a  definite 
thought  and  a  definite  molecular  action  in  the  brain 
occur  simultaneously,  we  do  not  possess  the  intel- 

*  Address  before  British  Association,  Aug.  i868. 


TTND ALL'S    TESTIMONT.  109 

lectual  organ,  nor  apparently  any  rudiment  of  the 
organ,  which  would  enable  us  to  pass  by  a  process 
of  reasoning  from  the  one  phenomenon  to  the  other. 
They  appear  together,  but  we  do  not  know  why. 
Were  our  minds  and  senses  so  expanded,  strength- 
ened, and  illuminated  as  to  enable  us  to  see  and  feel 
the  very  molecules  of  the  brain  ;  were  we  capable 
of  following  all  their  motions,  all  their  groupings, 
all  their  electric  discharges,  if  such  there  be,  and 
were  we  intimately  connected  with  the  correspond- 
ing states  of  thought  and  feeling,  —  we  should  prob- 
ably be  as  far  as  ever  from  the  solution  of  the 
problem,  How  are  these  physical  processes  con- 
nected with  the  facts  of  consciousness?  The  chasm 
between  the  two  classes  of  phenomena  would  still 
remain  intellectually  impassable.  Let  the  conscious- 
ness of  love,  for  example,  be  associated  with  a  right- 
handed  spiral  motion  of  the  molecules  of  the  brain, 
and  the  consciousness  of  hate  with  a  left-handed 
spiral  motion  :  we  should  then  know  when  we  love, 
that  the  motion  is  in  one  direction,  and  when  we  hate, 
the  motion  is  in  another  direction ;  but  the  Why 
would  still  remain  unanswered."  I  am  not  prepared 
to  accept  all  the  phraseology  employed  in  this  pas- 
sage about  the  phenomena  being  "  associated  "  and 
"  appearing  together,"  and  about  the  "  how "  and 
the  "  why."  We  shall  show  that  mind  obeys  laws 
of  its  own  very  different  from  those  of  matter.  As 
to  the  "how"  and  the  "why,"  they  are  in  the  end 
referred  by  this  whole  school  to  the  region  of  the 
unknowable,  and  they  may  assert  that,  though   we 


no  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

cannot  discover  the  "how"  and  the  "why,"  after  all 
thinking  may  be  material.  But  it  is  admitted  that 
we  are  conscious  of  thought  and  feeling,  of  love 
and  hate,  and  this  is  enough  for  my  present  purpose. 
The  consideration  of  the  more  subtle  materialism 
that  might  be  consistent  with  Mr.  Tyndall's  state- 
ment must  be  reserved  to  a  future  Lecture. 

II.  The  next  question  is,  What  does  the 
Mind  reveal  to  us?  And,  here,  in  order  to  set- 
tle what  realities  we  have,  we  must  first  be  rid  of 
certain  counterfeits.  For  we  are  met  at  this  point 
by  ghosts,  which  have  been  walking  abroad  in  the 
darkness.  I  have  been  seeking  for  years  past  to 
scare  them  away,  but  have  not  succeeded,  for  there 
are  still  persons  believing  in  them  and  frightening 
us  with  them  ;  and  it  is  the  law  of  the  life  of  errors, 
as  it  is  the  law  of  the  life  of  ghosts,  that,  as  long  as 
men  believe  in  them,  they  \m\\  apoear  :  the  demand 
brings  the  supply  ;  the  eye  that  is  looking  for  them 
will  certainly  see  them. 

I  hold,  very  strenuously,  that  man  is  so  consti- 
tuted that  he  can  attain  knowledge,  that  he  can 
know  things.  I  maintain  that  man's  intelligent 
acts  begin  with  his  knowing  things.  By  the 
senses  he  knows  things  :  his  own  bodily  frame  as 
affected  by  all  the  senses ;  a  solid  body  by  the 
muscular  sense,  and  a  colored  surface  by  the  eye. 
We  also  know  things  by  self-consciousness,  or 
the  inward  sense  :  w^e  know  self  as  thinking,  feel- 
ing or  willing  —  as  at  this  moment  pleased  or  not 
pleased  with  this  Lecture.     I  have  studiously  chosen 


AMBIGUITT  OF  'THING   IN  ITSELF r       III 

my  words.  In  using  them,  I  do  not  mean  that  we 
know  simply  thinking,  feeling,  or  willing:  these 
have  no  separate  or  independent  existence,  —  have 
no  existence  apart  from  self  thinking,  feeling,  or 
willing,  —  are  in  fact  mere  abstractions.  What 
we  know  is  self  thinking,  feeling,  wilHng ;  not  self 
apart  from  these  operations,  but  self  in  these  opera- 
tions. This  may  seem  too  nice  a  distinction;  but 
it  is  the  only  expression  which  unfolds  the  full 
truth.  A  man  is  not  conscious  of  thinking  apart 
from  self,  any  more  than  he  is  conscious  of  self 
apart  from  thinking,  or  some  other  exercise.  It 
appears,  then,  that,  both  by  the  outward  and  the 
inward  sense,  we  begin  with  knowledge,  with  the 
knowledge  of  things. 

But  I  hear  some  one  asking  in  astonishment, 
Do  you  really  mean  to  say  that  you  know  the 
thing,  —  the  thing  in  itself  ?  It  is  said  of  Scotchmen , 
whether  justly  or  not  I  will  not  take  it  upon  myself 
to  say  — for  I  am  not  altogether  impartial  in  speak- 
ing of  Scotchmen  —  but,  truly  or  falsely,  it  is 
alleged  of  Scotchmen  that,  when  asked  a  sharp 
question,  they  are  apt  to  put  a  sharp  question  in 
return.  I  am  inchned  to  use  the  Scotchman's  privi- 
lege on  this  occasion,  and  inquire,  What  do  you 
mean  by  a  thing  in  itself?  The  phrase  is  a 
German  one,  the  translation  of  Ding  an  sick,  so 
frequently  used  by  Kant,  and  with  which  so  many 
have  been  conjuring  of  late  years.  What  a  thing 
means,  I  know;  and  I  hold  that,  in  every  exercise 
of  the  senses,  we  know  the  thing,  this  body  or  that 


112  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

body ;  and  that  in  every  exercise  of  self-conscious- 
ness we  know  the  thing  itself,  that  is,  ourselves 
in  a  particular  state.  But  what  is  meant  by  the 
thing  in  itself  I  do  not  know ;  and,  think  it  proper 
not  to  affect  to  know.  Does  it  mean  that,  besides 
the  thing  we  know,  there  is  something  else,  —  a 
thing  flus  itself?  This  itself,  in  addition  to  the 
thing,  I  confess  I  do  not  know;  and,  as  knowing 
nothing  of  it,  I  have  no  faith  in  its  existence,  and 
I  do  not  see  any  purpose  to  be  served  by  it.  If  it 
mean  that  the  thing  is  within  the  thing,  I  have 
about  as  clear  a  notion  of  what  is  signified  as  I 
have  of  the  whale  that  swallowed  itself,  or  of  the 
Kilkenny  cats  which  ate  one  another  all  but  the 
tails.  Maintaining  that  we  know  the  thing,  I  give 
up  the  i7i  itself  to  metaphysicians  as  a  ghost  to 
be  believed  in,  or  not  believed  in,  just  as  they 
please. 

But  then  it  is  declared,  gravely  and  pompously, 
by  men, who  look  as  if  they  were  possessed  of  all 
wisdom,  that  we  do  not  know  things,  but  -phe- 
nomena; that  is,  appearances.  And  if,  by  this,  they 
mean  that  we  can  know  things  only  so  far  as  they 
manifest  themselves  to  us,  I  admit  it :  it  is  a  truth ; 
it  is  a  truism.  We  know  things  only  so  far  as  they 
appear  unto  us.  A  man  without  eyes  cannot  see ; 
without  hearing,  cannot  hear.  But  then  it  is  the 
things  which  manifest  themselves  unto  us  that  we 
know.  An  appearance  without  a  thing  appearing 
is  inconceivable,  is  an  impossibility.  Even  a  cloud 
appearing  has  something,  is  something  :  it  is  moist- 


MATTER  AND  MIND  ARE   SUBSTANCES.    113 

ure  in  a  vaporous  state ;  and,  were  we  to  enter  it,  it 
would  leave  some  of  its  sprinklings  upon  us.  A 
shadow,  even,  is  a  something  :  it  implies  a  dense 
body  obstructing  light,  and  keeping  it  from  falling 
on  a  defined  surface.  An  image  in  a  mirror  is 
something  :  it  requires  glass  and  quicksilver,  and 
rays  of  light  and  an  eye.  In  one  of  Longfellow's 
works,  there  is  a  dispute  as  to  w^hether  the  narcissus, 
or  its  shadow  reflected  in  the  water,  is  the  reality. 
The  dispute  can  be  settled.  Both  have  a  reality  : 
the  one  in  a  solid  plant,  the  other  in  rays  of  light 
coming  from  the  plant  and  thence  reflected.  I  admit 
that  we  know  phenomena,  and  only  phenomena, 
but  this  in  the  sense  of  things  appearing. 

But  then  it  is  said.  Surely,  you  do  not  pretend 
that  you  know  matter  and  mind  as  substances  ? 
Before  replying,  I  have  once  more  to  insist  that  it 
be  explained  what  is  meant  by  the  phrase.  Accord- 
ing to  Locke,  and  English  metaphysicians,  it  means 
something  lying  under,  underneath,  or  behind  the 
thing  known.  Locke  says,  Hamilton  says,  that 
this  something  is  unknown  and  unknowable.  Now, 
I  am  prepared  to  give  up  this  substance  beneath 
the  thing,  even  as  I  gave  up  the  in  itself^  which 
some  place  within  the  thing.  This  addition  is  sup- 
posed to  be  a  substratum  or  support.  But  I  am 
not  sure  that  the  thing,  say  mind  or  body,  needs 
any  such  support.  I  cannot  see  that  this  shadowy 
thing,  unknown  and  unknowable,  cloud  or  abyss, 
or  pit  or  darkness,  is  fitted  as  a  substratum  to  bear 
up  mind  and  body,  which  may  require  nothing  else 


114  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

to  uphold  them  as  a  substratum,  beyond  the  powers 
with  which  God  has  endowed  them. 

But  while  I  am  ready  to  dispense  with  this  under- 
support,  as  an  intermeddler  which  would  separate 
us  from  things,  I  maintain  very  resolutely  that  mind 
and  body  are  entitled,  not  by  the  aid  of  any  thing 
else,  but  of  themselves,  to  be  regarded  as  sub- 
stances. And  if  some  one  pay  me  back  in  my  own 
coin,  and  ask  me  what  I  mean  by  substance,  I  am 
prepared  to  answer.  There  are  three  things  in- 
volved in  substance  :  First,  it  has  being  ;  or,  to  speak 
more  plainly,  the  thing  exists.  Secondly,  it  has 
potency ;  that  is,  power  to  act.  Thirdly,  it  has  a 
permanence,  or  a  certain  continuance  and  endur- 
ance, —  such  an  abiding  nature  that  it  is  not  created 
by  our  looking  at  it ;  nor  does  it  cease  to  exist 
because  we  have  ceased  to  contemplate  it.  What- 
ever possesses  these  three  qualities,  I  call  a  sub- 
stance. Both  mind  and  matter  are  known  as 
possessing  them.  Mind,  that  is  self,  is  known, 
first,  as  having  existence  or  being.  We  thus  know 
it  in  every  act  of  self-consciousness.  True,  we 
can  say  little  about  bare  being  or  existence  ;  but 
this  not  because  we  do  not  know  it,  but  because  it 
is  so  simple.  About  complicated  objects  we  can 
say  a  great  deal  —  for  instance,  about  the  Roman 
empire,  and  modern  civilization,  and  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States — because  of  their  many 
elements  and  relations.  But  we  can  say  little  of 
such  things  as  pain  and  pleasure  and  self,  not  be- 
cause we  do  not  know  them,  but  because  every  one 


CHARACTERISTICS    OF  SUBSTANCE.        115 

knows  them,  and  they  cannot  be  made  clearer  by  a 
description  :  they  involve  no  composition,  and  are 
not  made  up  of  ingredients. 

"  Who  thinks  of  asking  if  the  sun  is  light, 
Obsei"ving  that  it  lightens?" 

Those  who  attempt  any  thing  more,  and  to  peer 
into  the  object,  will  find  that  the  light  (like  that  of 
the  sun  j  darkens  as  they  gaze  upon  it.  "  When  I 
burned  in  desire  to  question  them  farther,  they 
made  themselves  —  air,  into  which  they  vanished." 
Again,  we  know  mind  as  having  potency  or  power ; 
as  influencing  other  things,  and  being  influenced 
by  other  things  ;  as  exercising  power  over  its  own 
thoughts  and  over  the  bodily  frame.  Once  more  : 
I  know  it  as  so  far  permanent  and  independent  that 
it  is  not  a  mere  momentary  or  ephemeral  impres- 
sion or  idea  ;  it  is  not  created  by  my  looking  at  it ; 
it  existed  prior  to  my  observing  it,  and  it  was  because 
it  did  so,  that  I  was  able  to  observe  it ;  and  it  does 
not  cease  to  exist  because  I  have  ceased  to  view 
it.  The  mind  (like  the  body)  having  these  three 
attributes,  — being,  potency,  and  permanence,  —  is 
to  be  regarded  as  a  substance. 

It  is  necessary  to  establish  these  points  ;  for,  ever 
since  the  days  of  David  Hume,  and  especially  in 
these  days  of  revived  scepticism,  the  subtlest  form 
of  infidelity  proceeds  on  the  denial  of  them.  The 
denial  is  defended  by  metaphysicists,  and  is  eagerly 
seized  by  physicists,  who  are  no  philosophers,  but 
who  are  anxious  to  have  a  philosophy  to  serve  their 


Il6  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

purpose.     The  whole  school  which  I  am  opposing 
are  defenders  of  the 

DOCTRINE    OF    NESCIENCE. 

It  is  called  Nescience,  in  so  far  as  it  holds  that 
man  knows  nothing,  and  can  know  nothing  of  the 
nature  of  things ;  and  Nihilism,  inasmuch  as  it 
is  averred  that  there  can  be  nothing  known.  It  is 
acknowledged  that  we  are  cognizant  of  appear- 
ances ;  but  then  we  do  not  and  never  can  know 
w^iether  these  correspond  to  realities.  This  doc- 
trine is  commonly  attributed  to  M.  Comte  ;  but  the 
true  author  of  it  is  my  countryman,  David  Hume. 
Hume  is  commonly  called  the  sceptic,  and  he  did 
not  repudiate  the  name ;  but  the  epithet  scarcely 
characterizes  him.  He  did  not  profess  to  deny  the 
existence  of  God,  or  any  thing  else.  He  was  evi- 
dently painfully  affected,  when  the  French  Ency- 
clopedists claimed  him  as  an  atheist.  When  the 
pert  Mrs.  Mallet  came  to  him,  and  said:  "We 
deists  ought  to  know  one  another,"  he  replied 
sternly  (so  differently  from  his  usual  good-nature)  : 
"Who  told  you  that  I  was  a  deist?"  His  professed 
aim  was  to  show  that  man  can  never  know  any 
thing  of  the  nature  of  things,  —  can  never  reach 
philosophic  truth,  certainly  never  theological  truth. 
Huxley  very  properly  sets  aside  Comte  as  the 
founder  of  this  school  of  philosophy.  "So  far  as  I 
am  concerned,  the  most  reverend  prelate  might 
dialectically  hew  M.  Comte  in  pieces  as  a  modern 
Agag,  and  I  would  not  attempt  to  stay  his  hand. 


DOCTRINE    OF  NESCIENCE.  117 

In  SO  far  as  my  study  of  what  specially  character- 
izes the  Positive  Philosophy  has  led  me,  I  find 
therein  little  or  nothing  of  any  scientific  value,  and 
a  great  deal  which  is  thoroughly  antagonistic  to 
the  very  essence  of  science  as  any  thing  in  Ultra- 
montane Catholicism."  The  secret  truth  is,  that 
the  British  followers  of  Comte  do  not  like  him  ; 
because,  feeling  that  he  himself  and  mankind  gen- 
erally need  to  have  a  faith  and  a  worship,  he  busied 
himself,  in  his  later  days,  in  constructing  a  religion 
of  his  own,  which  is  certainly  sufficiently  ludicrous, 
but  is  after  all  a  reproach  on  those  who  have  no 
religion.  Mr.  Huxley  claims  to  install  Hume  as 
the  founder  and  head  of  the  philosophy  which  he 
adopts,  and  which  I  am  inclined  to  call  Humism. 
Hume  says  :  "All  the  perceptions  of  the  human 
mind  resolve  themselves  into  two  distinct  kinds  of 
impressions  and  ideas."  *  He  begins  with  impres- 
sions and  ideas,  —  momentary  impressions  and 
ideas,  — and  not  with  things,  and  he  declares,  very 
properly,  that  out  of  these  he  can  draw  no  realities. 
I  meet  this  by  showing  that  the  mind  commences, 
not  with  mere  impressions  and  ideas,  but  with  the 
knowledge  of  things  ;   and  on  this  primary  knowl- 

*  "The  difference  betwixt  these  consists  in  the  degree  of 
force  and  liveliness  with  which  they  strike  upon  the  mind,  and 
make  their  way  into  our  thought  or  consciousness.  Those  per- 
ceptions which  enter  with  most  force  and  violence  we  may  name 
impressions;  and  under  this  name  I  comprehend  all  our  sensa- 
tions, passions,  and  emotions,  as  they  make  their  first  appear 
ance  in  the  soul.  By  ideas,  I  mean  the  faint  images  of  these  in 
thinking  and  reasoning."  —  Opening  of  Treatise  of  Human 
Nature. 


Il8  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

edge  it  builds  other  and  higher.  And  if  I  am 
asked  for  the  proof,  I  answer  that  I  have  the  same 
evidence  of  it  as  I  have  of  the  existence  of  impres- 
sions and  ideas.  I  never  do  know  an  impression, 
except  as  an  impression  of  self,  the  thing  impressed  ; 
and,  in  doing  so,  I  know  both  the  impression  and 
the  thing  impressed.  I  am  never  conscious  of  an 
idea  except  as  an  idea  entertained  by  me.  The 
two  ever  go  together ;  and  if  I  allow  the  existence 
of  the  one,  I  must  allow  the  existence  of  the  other : 
the  one  is  as  certain  as  the  other ;  the  one  has  the 
same  self-evidence  as  the  other.  He  who  builds 
on  any  other  foundation  is  building,  not  on  the 
rock,  not  even  on  the  sand,  but  on  a  surface  of 
waters,  or  in  the  fleeting  clouds.  He  who  adopts 
the  fundamental  principle,  that  the  mind  does  not 
start  with  the  knowledge  of  things,  must  take  all 
the  rest.  He  must  go  through  with  it,  even  though 
it  should  carry  and  leave  him  w^iere  it  left  Hume  ; 
tliat  is,  in  inextricable  thickets  and  sinking  swamps, 
in  which  he  must  wander  on  for  ever,  without  com- 
ing to  a  termination  :  taking  now  this  road,  and  now 
that  road,  to  find  them  all  "  passages  which  lead 
to  nothing ;  "  beginning  nowhere,  and  ending  no- 
where, crossing  and  recrossing,  as  the  children  of 
Israel  did  in  their  wanderings,  but  with  no  Canaan 
remaining  for  him  as  a  place  of  rest. 

DOCTRINE    OF    RELATIVITY. 

Closely    allied    to    this    doctrine    of    Nescience, 
springing    out    of   it    or   leading   to   it,    is   that    of 


DOC  TRINE   OF  RE  LA  Tl  VIT2'.  1 1 9 

the  Relativity  of  Knowledge  ;  that  is,  that  the  mind 
does  not  perceive  things,  but  the  relations  of  things, 
of  things  utterly  unknown.  Grote  thinks  that  this 
was  the  doctrine  of  Protagoras,  the  old  Greek 
sophist,  when  he  maintained  that  "  man  is  the 
measure  of  all  things."  Now,  I  do  not  reject 
this  doctrine  because  it  was  held  by  the  sophists  : 
I  reject  it  because  it  is  sophistic  in  the  expression 
and  defence  of  it.  I  reject  it  as  so  far  untrue.  I 
am  not  bound  to  accept  it  because  it  has  been  held 
by  men  whom  I  profoundly  revere  :  such  as  Sir 
William  Hamilton,  of  Edinburgh  ;  Dr.  Ulrici,  of 
Halle  ;  and  Dr.  Mansel,  of  Oxford.  On  Hamilton's 
publishing  the  doctrine  in  his  "  Discussions  on  Phi- 
losophy," I  examined  it  in  the  Appendix  to  a  new 
edition  of  my  work  on  the  "  Divine  Government ;  " 
and  Hamilton  meant  to  reply,  but  was  prevented  by 
infirmities  terminating  in  his  death.  I  labored  to 
show  that  it  was  not  agreeable  to  consciousness, 
and  that  it  w^ould  certainly  lead  to  fatal  conse- 
quences. I  was  one  of  the  first  to  protest,  which 
I  did  in  an  article  in  the  "North  British  Review" 
(Feb.  1859),  against  Dr.  Hansel's  application  of 
the  doctrine,  in  his  famous  Bampton  Lectures  on 
the  "  Limits  of  Religious  Thought,"  to  the  defence 
of  Religion,  Natural  and  Revealed.  Dr.  Mansel 
thought  to  employ  it  to  undermine  Rationalism  ;  but, 
in  doing  so,  he  undermined  as  well  the  ground  on 
which  religion  stands  —  some  one  describes  him  as 
going  out  with  a  scythe  to  cutofi^the  legs  of  others, 
and  succeeding  in  cutting  off  his  own  legs.     Mr. 


I20  NATURAL   THEOLOGY. 

Mill,  as  we  might  expect,  has  accepted  the  doc- 
trine, only  complaining  that  Hamilton  does  not 
carry  it  out  consistently  and  consecutively.  But 
people  did  not  see  the  consequences  till  Herbert 
Spencer  laid  his  whole  system  upon  it  as  upon  a 
bottomless  abyss.  It  is  a  principle  adopted  by  the 
whole  school,  and  employed  by  them  to  undermine 
all  higher  truth,  philosophic  and  theological.  We 
have  seen  that  Tyndall,  when  sore  pressed  with  a 
difficulty  about  life  and  mind  coming  out  of  the 
incandescent  star  dust,  seeks  to  extricate  himself 
by  appealing  to  "  the  law  of  relativity,  which  plays 
so  important  a  part  in  modern  philosophy." 

The  doctrine  so  designated  takes  as  many  shapes 
as  Proteus  ;  and  when  we  would  seize  it  in  one  form 
it  takes  another,  and  so  eludes  our  grasp.  It  has, 
however,  a  true  shape ;  and,  when  it  takes  this,  we 
have  only  to  commend  it.  There  is  a  sense,  or 
rather  there  are  senses,  in  which  man's  knowledge 
is  relative.  First,  he  can  know  only  so  far  as  he 
has  a  capacity  of  knowing.  In  this  sense,  man's 
knowledge  is  all  relative  to  himself.  A  man  who 
has  no  eyes  cannot  know  color ;  who  has  no  ears 
cannot  know  sounds.  There  is  the  farther  truth 
that  man  has  the  capacity  of  discovering  relations 
between  himself  and  other  things,  and  between  one 
thing  and  another.  There  is  a  third  doctrine  which 
is  also  true,  that  man's  knowledge  is  finite  :  he  can- 
not know  all  things  ;  he  cannot  know  all  about  any 
one  thing.  This,  however,  is  not  a  doctrine  of 
relativity  :  it  is  the  old  doctrine  of  man's  knowledge 


DOCTRINE   OF  RELATIVITT.  121 

being  finite  and  not  infinite,  so  earnestly  inculcated 
by  the  Fathers  of  the  Church,  and  by  the  profound- 
est  divines  and  philosophers  of  modern  times.  So 
far  we  have  truths,  and  truths  of  some  importance, 
though  the  phrase  Relativity  is  scarcely  the  word 
by  which  to  express  them. 

But  this  solid  truth  is  employed  as  a  means  of 
gathering  round  it  other  and  tenebrous  matter,  —  as 
the  cuttle-fish,  when  we  would  catch  it,  surrounds 
itself  with  inky  darkness.  The  doctrine,  as  inter- 
preted by  its  defenders,  means  that  we  know  rela- 
tions and  not  things  ;  and,  in  the  case  of  some,  that 
it  is  the  mind  that  creates  the  relations,  and  that  it 
adds  the  relation  out  of  its  own  stores.  When  it 
can  be  made  to  take  and  to  keep  this  shape,  I  seize 
it  at  once.  This  doctrine  must  issue  logically  in 
Nescience.  Relations  between  things  unknown  can 
never  yield  knowledge.  But  I  condemn  it,  not  for 
its  consequences,  but  because  it  is  untrue,  because 
it  is  inconsistent  with  consciousness. 

It  is  inconceivable  that  we  should  know  relations 
between  things  unknown.  A  relation  is  the  aspect 
of  things  towards  each  other  :  the  Greeks  desig- 
nated it  by  nohi  ti.  If  the  things  were  to  cease,  there 
would  be  no  relation ;  and  if  the  things  were 
unknown,  there  would  be  no  relations  known. 
Gravitation  is  a  relation  of  one  body  to  another,  sa}' 
between  the  sun  and  the  earth  ;  but  if  there  w^ere 
no  sun  and  no  earth,  there  would  be  no  such  rela- 
tion, and  if  the  sun  and  earth  were  unknown  to 
me,  I  could  never  know  a  relation  between  them. 

6 


122  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

A  relation  is  a  relation  of  things  known,  —  so  far 
known,  —  known  qua  that  relation.  We  know  that 
we  are  related  to  our  fellow-men,  because  we  know 
what  we  are,  and  what  our  fellow-men  are.  We 
know  in  what  relation  we  stand  to  God,  because 
we  so  far  know  God  and  know  ourselves. 

The  settlement  of  these  points  will  be  found  to 
have  a  more  direct  bearing  than  might  at  first  appear 
upon  our  argument.  If  man's  soul  be  material,  we 
have  really  no  ground  on  which  to  proceed  in  infer- 
ring that  there  is  a  spiritual  God.  The  subtlest  form 
of  infidelity  in  our  day  proceeds  on  the  principle 
that  man  knows  nothing  of  the  nature  or  realit}^  of 
things,  or  that  he  can  know  nothing  except  rela- 
tions between  things  unknown.  It  no  longer  takes 
the  form  of  rationalism,  pretending  to  discover  truth 
which  in  fact  revelation  has  made  known,  and  in 
the  end  setting  itself  above  revelation :  it  makes 
human  reason  proclaim  that  it  cannot  discover  any 
truth  beyond  and  above  the  phenomena  of  sentient 
experience.  It  does  not  just  deny  that  there  is  a 
God,  —  this,  it  says,  would  be  unphilosophical, — 
but  it  declares  that  God,  if  there  be  a  God,  is  and 
must  be  unknown.  It  does  not  say  that  man  has 
not  a  soul ;  but  it  identifies  that  soul  with  the  body, 
and  thus  leaves  no  evidence  that  the  soul  may  live 
after  the  body  dies.  It  is  of  course  unreasonable 
to  seek  after  this  unknowable  God  if  haply  we  may 
find  him,  or  to  imagine  that  we  are  bound  to  pay 
him  worship,  or  that  we  have  any  duties  to  discharge 
towards  him;  and  as  to  the  otliQr  world,  if  there  be 


DOCTRINE   OF  RELATIVITT.  123 

another  world,  we  may  not  draw  from  it  any  fears 
of  punishment  or  hopes  of  blessedness.  In  meet- 
ing this  fundamental  scepticism,  we  need  to  stand 
up  for  the  veracity  of  the  human  faculties,  and  to 
show  that  the  same  powers  which  guide  correctly 
in  the  business  of  life  and  in  the  pursuits  of  science 
are  legitimately  fitted  to  conduct  to  a  reasonable 
belief  in  One  presiding  over  the  works  of  nature 
and  providentially  guiding  our  lot.  This  baldest  of 
all  the  philosophies,  which  have  sprung  up  in  our 
world,  is  requiring  reason  to  abnegate  one  of  its 
indefeasible  rights,  is  cutting  the  root  which  sup- 
ports man's  most  aspiring  hopes,  is  denying  to  the 
soul  its  highest  exercises,  is  shearing  it  of  its  chief 
glories.  It  is  unlawfully  circumscribing  that  noble 
view  which  reason  opens,  and  laboring  to  keep  man 
gazing  for  ever  on  the  ground  like  the  beast,  when 
his  destiny  is  to  look  out  on  that  distant  horizon  and 
upward  to  the  glories  of  heaven. 


Mental  Principles  involved  in  the  Theistic  Argument. 
—  Our  Ideas  lead  us  to  believe  in  God  and  clothe 
HIM  with  Power,  Personality,  Goodness,  and  Infin- 
ity. —  God  so  far  Known.  —  Criticism  of  Mr.  Herbert 
Spencer.  —  God  so  far  Unknown. 

TN  these  Lectures  I  have  been  looking  first  at  the 
-*■  physical  world  as  it  is  regarded  by  modern 
science.  But  the  physical  facts  do  not  show  that 
there  is  a  God,  unless  we  take  along  with  them  cer- 
tain general  principles.  This  induced  me  in  my  last 
Lecture  to  turn  to  Mental  Science,  when  I  showed, 
first,  that  the  mind  exists  ;  and,  secondly,  that  it  has 
the  capacity  of  acquiring  knowledge.  I  am  now  to 
show  that,  in  the  exercise  of  this  its  capacity,  it  can 
rise  to  the  knowledge  of  God  and  clothe  him  with 
infinite  perfections.* 

Let  us  understand  what  I  maintain  in  regard  to 
man's  capacity  of  knowledge.  I  hold  that  he  has  a 
power  of  intuition  ;  that  is,  of  looking  directly  on 
things  without  him  and  things  within.     But  I  cer- 

*  In  this  Lecture  I  have  used  the  principles  established  in  my 
work  on  the  "Intuitions  of  the  Mind,"  to  which  I  refer  those 
who  may  wish  to  see  the  foundation  on  which  I  build  more  fully 
discussed. 


MAN  KNOWS    THINGS.  125 

tainly  do  not  stand  sponsor  for  such  innate  ideas  as 
Locke  exposed  till  they  perished  with  no  one  to 
protect  them.  Nor  do  I  defend  those  a  priori  forms 
which  the  mind,  according  to  Kant,  imposes  on 
tilings,  giving  to  things  what  is  not  in  the  things,  or 
announcing  beforehand  what  things  are,  or  what 
they  should  be.  Out  of  these  a  ^?'wri  iorms,  cate- 
gories, and  ideas,  able  men  in  Germany  constructed 
in  the  last  age  a  solemn  and  ambitious  speculative 
philosophy,  which  has  had  its  brief  season  in  Britain 
and  America,  and  may  still  be  seen  lingering  among 
us,  like  venerable  gray  locks  on  the  heads  of  men 
above  fifty.  But,  like  the  foliage  in  the  fall,  it  has 
faded  into  the  "sere  and  yellow  leaf;"  and,  though 
still  shining  in  gorgeous  colors,  its  destiny  is  to 
die  ;  when,  as  it  contains  some  elements  of  truth,  it 
may  help,  I  hope,  to  form  a  fruitful  soil,  —  so  diifer- 
ent  from  a  barren  sensationalism,  —  out  of  which 
something  better  may  spring.  What  I  stand  up  for 
is  a  much  less  proud  and  pretentious  thing  :  it  is  not 
a  form  to  be  imposed  or  superinduced  on  things,  but 
a  power  of  looking  at  things.  This  knowledge  is, 
at  first,  only  of  individual  things,  —  of  things  in  the 
concrete,  as  they  present  themselves.  But  out  of 
this  it  can  draw  great  abstract  and  general  truths, 
rising  out  of  great  depths  and  mounting  to  great 
heights,  constituting  a  body  of  philosophy  based  on 
the  earth,  but  towering  to  heaven.  It  is  because 
we  have  this  original  knowledge  that  we  can  add 
to  it  derived  knowledge.  Having  this  acquaintance 
with  individual  things,  we  can  rise  to  general  laws 


126  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

about  things.  Having  begun  with  realities,  not  with 
mere  impressions,  ideas,  and  phenomena,  all  that 
we  reach  by  the  abstracting,  generalizing  process 
is  also  real ;  and  this  not  only  a  reality  in  thought, 
but,  thought  being  rightly  conducted,  a  reality  in 
things. 

And,  among  other  things  which  we  thus  perceive 
directly  and  intuitively,  I  hold  that  there  is  Power; 
not  Power  in  the  abstract,  but  things  exercising 
Power.  This  gives  the  principle  of  Cause  and 
Effect.  I  know  that  I  have  come  to  a  keenly 
agitated  question.  It  is  acknowledged  on  all  hands 
that  the  law  of  universal  causation  is  sanctioned  by 
an  enlarged  experience.  It  is  confessed  to  be  the 
widest  law  which  the  mind  of  man  has  reached. 
No  exceptions  have  been  found  to  it,  in  any  part  at 
least  of  the  physical  universe,  near  or  far.  But 
some  of  us  maintain  that  it  is  more  ;  that  it  is  a  con- 
viction of  our  mental  nature,  not  a  conviction  above 
objective  things,  but  a  conviction  in  regard  to  things. 
I  hold,  our  consciousness  witnessing  thereto,  that  we 
perceive  things,  both  within  and  without  us,  not 
merely  as  having  existence,  but  as  having  potency. 
We  cannot  know  directly  any  object  without  us, 
except  as  having  power  upon  us.  When  we  act, 
we  are  exercising  power.  Potenc3s  or  property  of 
some  kind,  is  an  essential  element  of  things  as  known 
to  us.  When  a  thing  is  known  to  me,  I  know  it, 
not  as  an  impression,  an  idea,  a  bare  phenomenon  : 
I  know  it  as  exercising  power  on  me  or  some  other 
thing.     Thus   knowing    power  intuitively,   we    are 


PRINCIPLE    OF   CAUSE  AND  EFFCT.         1 27 

constrained  to  connect  an  effect,  a  thing  effected, 
with  a  thing  having  power  to  produce  it. 

But  how  does  all  this  bear,  it  may  be  asked,  on  the 
religious  question?  I  answer,  Much  in  every  way. 
Our  knowledge  of  mind  is  needed,  in  addition  to 
our  knowledge  of  matter,  as  a  complement  to  make 
up  our  knowledge  of  God.  In  particular,  the  prin- 
ciple of  cause  and  effect  supplies  the  nexus  which 
connects  God  with  his  works.  We  have  seen  in 
previous  Lectures,  that  everywhere,  all  throughout 
the  Cosmos  and  throughout  the  ^ons,  there  is  an 
adaptation  of  one  thing  to  another,  of  every  part  to 
every  other,  of  the  part  to  the  v\^hole,  and  of  the 
whole  to  every  part.  This  shows  that  there  has 
been  a  disposition  and  an  arrangement,  —  in  short,  a 
thing  effected ;  and  this  entitles  us,  on  the  principle 
of  cause  and  effect,  to  argue  that  there  must  have 
been  a  cause.  It  has  the  guarantee  of  the  observa- 
tion of  external  nature,  which  goes  as  far  as  obser- 
vation can  go  in  establishing  a  universal  law.  But 
it  has  a  higher  certitude  —  the  guarantee  of  a  men- 
tal principle  looking  to  the  very  nature  of  things,  and 
entitling  us  to  argue,  not  merely  within  our  expe- 
rience, but  beyond  it,  as  to  things  in  general  and 
ever}^ where,  that  an  effect  must  have  a  cause  ;  not 
only  that  this  watch  has  had  a  watch-maker,  but 
that  this  orderly  constructed  world  has  had  a  world- 
maker. 

If  we  had  not  a  Spiritual  Nature  ourselves,  we 
could  not  rise  to  the  contemplation  of  God,  who  is 
a  Spirit.    Were  we  incapacitated  for  knowledge,  we 


128  NATURAL    THEOLOGY, 

could  not  mount  to  the  knowledge  and  contempla- 
tion of  God.  Did  we  not  know  ourselves  as  sub- 
stances, we  never  could  ascend  to  the  knowledge 
of  God  as  a  substance.  But,  from  the  nature  of  the 
effects  of  which  we  are  conscious  within  ourselves, 
we  ascend  to  the  recognition  of  a  cause  adequate  to 
produce  them.  Having  ourselves  a  spiritual  nature, 
we  conceive  of  God  as  a  spirit.  As  having  a  sense, 
or  rather  cognition,  of  powder  in  ourselves,  we  are 
led  to  clothe  with  power  the  Being  from  whom  we 
have  sprung.  If  we  believe  that  the  God  who  made 
the  eye  does  himself  see,  we  must  also  believe  that 
he  who  gave  us  our  knowing  powers  must  himself 
know. 

It  is  in  the  same  way  that  we  rise  to  a  belief  in 
the  Personality  of  God.  Some  of  those  who  have 
been  fixed  in  the  grasping  vice  of  the  metaphysics 
of  Kant  have  been  sorely  troubled  w^ith  this  ques- 
tion;  and  others,  who  picture  God  as  unknowable, 
have  taken  advantage  of  their  perplexities.  We 
may  be  "persons,"  they  say ;  but  then  it  is  because 
we  are  finite.  Personality,  they  urge,  implies  lim- 
itation. It  is  not  difficult,  I  think,  to  solve  this 
puzzle.  We  have  an  intuitive  knowledge  each  one 
of  himself  as  a  person  distinct  from  every  other 
person  and  from  the  world.  Kant,  without  mean- 
ing it,  led  the  whole  of  German  philosophy  into  a 
wide  waste  of  pantheism  by  not  allotting  to  person- 
ality a  place  among  the  original  cognitions  of  the 
mind,  —  as  he  unfortunately  called  them  "  forms  of 
the  mind."     Having  a  knowledge  of  ourselves   as 


PERSONALITY  AND  GOODNESS  OF  GOD.    I29 

persons,  we  can  rise  to  the  contemplation  of  God  as 
a  person,  of  God  as  different  from  his  works.  It  is 
true  that  we  are  limited  in  our  personality  as  in 
every  thing  else  :  it  does  not  follow  that  God  is  lim- 
ited in  his  personality  or  any  thing  else.  True,  if 
we  insist  on  saying  that  "God  is  all,  and  that  all  is 
1  God,"  we  cannot  give  him  personality;  but  thLU 
this  is  pantheism.  And  this  consciousness  which 
we  have  of  our  personality  is  the  truth  which  under- 
mines pantheism.  I  am  conscious  of  self  as  a  per- 
son different  from  the  universe,  different  from  God  ; 
so  that  God  cannot  be  all,  nor  can  all  be  God.  But 
God,  while  he  is  a  person  different  from  his  works, 
may  be  possessed  of  power,  wisdom,  goodness,  to 
which  no  limits  can  be  set. 

But  man  has  higher  perceptions  than  these  ;  and 
they  enable  him  to  clothe  the  Divine  Being  with 
still  higher  perfections.  In  looking  at  the  voluntary 
acts  of  intelligent  beings,  he  perceives  that  they 
may  be  good  or  that  they  may  be  evil :  he  sees  that 
gratitude  is  good,  and  that  cruelty  is  evil.  Let  us 
evolve  what  is  involved  in  this  idea.  The  good  per- 
ceived implies  that  we  are  under  obligation  to  attend 
to  it;  and  the  evil,  that  w^e  are  under  obligation  to 
avoid  it.  And  being  under  obligation  does  seem  to 
imply  that  we  are  under  obligation  to  a  Power,  or 
rather  a  Being  who  will  call  us  to  account.  This 
seems  to  point  to  God  as  the  Moral  Governor,  and  at 
last  to  be  the  Judge  of  the  Universe.  This  is  the 
only  argument  for  the  Divine  existence  which  seemed 
conclusive  to  Kant,  the  great  German  metaphysi- 

6* 


130  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

cian.  It  is  the  argument  that  seemed  the  strong 
est  to  the  eloquent  Scottish  Theologian  Chalmers. 
I  am  not  sure  that,  taken  b}^  itself,  it  is  sufficient  to 
prove  the  existence  of  a  living  Being  above  the 
world,  its  Maker  and  Preserver.  But  there  is  no 
need  of  taking  it  by  itself.  Combining  it  with  the 
argument  from  design,  it  proves  that  the  God  who 
lives  and  rules  in  this  world  is  possessed  of  moral 
excellence.  We  are  sure  that  he  who  planted  the 
moral  sense  within  us  must  approve  of  the  good 
which  it  would  lead  us  to  approve  of,  and  condemn 
the  evil  which  it  would  lead  us  to  condemn. 

I  am  quite  aware  of  the  process  by  which  persons 
endeavor  to  avoid  the  point  of  this  argument.  They 
would  account  for  these  moral  feelings  of  ours  by 
the  association  of  ideas,  which  exercises  some  sort 
of  chemical  power  upon  our  ideas,  and  transmutes 
ideas  got  from  sense  into  ideas  of  moral  good. 
Now,  in  opposition  to  this,  I  hold  that  the  laws  of 
association  are  the  mere  laws  of  the  succession  of 
our  ideas  and  attached  feelings,  and  can  generate 
no  new  idea  without  a  special  inlet  from  without  or 
capacity  within.  Association  cannot  give  a  man 
born  blind  the  least  idea  of  color,  and  as  little  can 
it  produce  any  other  idea.  By  mixing  the  colors 
of  yellow  and  blue,  the  hand  could  produce  green  : 
but  give  a  person  the  idea  of  yellow  and  the  idea 
of  blue,  and  from  the  two  he  could  not  manufacture 
the  idea  of  green  ;  still  less  could  he,  from  these 
sensations  or  any  others,  form  such  ideas  as  those 
of  moral   good  and  evil.     Take  the  perception  of 


IDEAS   NOT   GOT  BT  ASSOCIATION.         131 

consci'ence,  that  deceit  is  a  sin.  Take  the  convic- 
tion, that  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  tell  a  lie,  when  we 
might  be  tempted  to  do  so.  Take  the  judgment, 
that  the  person  who  has  committed  the  act  is  guilty, 
condemnable,  punishable.  Take  the  feeling  of  re- 
morse which  rises  when  we  contemplate  ourselves 
as  having  told  a  falsehood.  Take  the  very  peculiar 
and  profound  ideas  denoted  by  the  phrases  '^  obliga- 
tion," "ought,"  "blameworthy."  We  have  here  a 
series  of  mental  phenomena  quite  as  real,  and  quite 
as  worthy  of  being  looked  at,  as  our  very  sensations 
or  ideas  of  pleasure  and  pain. 

Give  us  mere  sensations,  say  of  sounds  or  colors 
or  forms,  or  of  pleasure  and  pain,  and  they  will 
never  be  any  thing  else,  in  the  reproduction  of 
them,  than  the  ideas  of  sounds,  colors,  forms,  pleas- 
ures, or  pains  ;  unless,  indeed,  there  be  some  new 
power  introduced,  and  this  new  element,  in  itself  or 
in  conjunction  with  the  sensations,  be  fitted  to  pro- 
duce a  new  idea,  and  that  very  idea.  The  process 
by  which  some  affect  to  generate  our  moral  beliefs 
is  like  that  of  the  old  alchemists,  who,  when  they 
put  earth  into  the  retort,  never  could  get  any  thing 
but  earth,  and  who  could  get  gold  only  by  surrepti- 
tiously introducing  some  substance  containing  gold. 
The  philosopher's  stone  of  this  psychology  is  of 
tlie  same  character  as  tliat  employed  in  mediaeval 
physics.  If  they  put  in  sensations  only,  as  some 
do,  they  never  have  any  thing  but  sensations;  and 
a  "dirt  philosophy,"  as  it  has  been  called,  is  the 
product.      If  gold  is  got,  it  can  only  be  because  it 


132  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

has  been  quietly  introduced  by  the  person  who 
exhibits  it.  Provided  we  had  the  ideas,  the  laws 
of  association  might  show  how  they  could  be  brought 
up  again ;  and  how,  in  the  reproduction,  certain 
parts  might  sink  into  shadow  and  neglect,  while 
others  came  forth  into  light  and  prominence  ;  and 
how  the  whole  feeling,  by  the  confluence  of  differ- 
ent ideas,  might  be  w^rought  into  a  glow  of  inten- 
sit}'  :  but  the  difficulty  of  generating  the  ideas,  such 
ideas,  ideas  so  full  of  meaning,  is  not  thereby  sur- 
mounted. The  idea  I  have  of  pain  is  one  thing, 
and  the  idea  I  have  of  deceit  —  that  it  is  morally  evil, 
condemnable,  deserving  of  pain  —  is  an  entirely  dif- 
ferent thing,  our  consciousness  being  witness.  On 
the  supposition  that  there  is  a  chemical  power,  as 
is  alleged,  in  association  to  create  such  ideas  as 
those  of  duty  and  merit,  sin  and  demerit,  this  chem- 
ical power  would  be  a  native  moral  power  ;  not  the 
product  of  sensations,  but  a  pow^r  above  them,  and 
fitted  to  transmute  them  from  the  baser  into  the 
golden  substance,  and  would  entitle  us  to  clothe 
that  Being,  w^ho  had  given  us  such  power,  with  the 
moral  qualities  with  which  he  has  endowed  us. 

But  then  it  is  urged  that  all  that  you  have  said 
does  not  prove  that  this  Being,  whom  you  have  thus 
clothed  with  power  and  goodness,  is  the  Infinite 
God.  I  admit  this  at  once.  No  one  ever  said  that 
it  does.  The  physical  works  of  God  in  the  earth 
and  heavens  can  never  furnish  proof  of  any  thing 
more  than  the  large,  the  immense,  the  indefinite, 
—  not  the  infinite.     To  argue  otherwise  would  be 


INFINITY  OF   GOD.  133 

placing  in  the  conclusion  what  is  not  in  the  prem- 
ises. If  we  would  clothe  God  with  infinity,  we 
must  look  within  to  our  perceptions  and  belief  as 
to  infinity. 

I  feel  that  I  am  approaching  a  profound  subject. 
It  is  not  easy  to  sound  its  depths.  It  was  long 
before  I  was  able  to  attain  any  thing  like  clear 
ideas  on  the  subject.  I  have  pondered  for  many 
successive  hours  on  it,  only  to  find  it  shrouding 
itself  in  deeper  mysterj^.  On  the  one  hand,  I  found 
the  more  profound  philosophers  of  the  continent  of 
Europe  giving  this  idea  of  the  Infinite  a  high  place, 
indeed  the  highest  place,  in  their  systems.  In 
coming  back  from  flights  in  company  with  the 
German  metaphysicians,  to  inquire  of  British  phi- 
losophers what  they  make  of  this  idea,  I  found  their 
views  meagre  and  unsatisfactory  ;  for  the  idea  of  the 
infinite,  according  to  them,  is  a  mere  negation,  a 
mere  impotency.  But  if  we  can  entertain  no  such 
idea,  how  do  all  men  speak  of  it  ?  If  it  be  a  mere 
impotency,  how  do  we  come  to  clothe  the  Divine 
Being  with  Infinity? 

Feeling  as  if  I  needed  somewhere  to  find  it,  I 
proceed  in  the  truly  British  or  Baconian  method 
to  inquire.  How  does  such  an  idea  or  belief  in  the 
infinite,  as  the  mind  actually  has,  rise  within  us,  and 
what  is  its  precise  nature?  The  imagination  can 
add  and  add  :  so  far,  we  have  the  immense,  the  in- 
definite. Thus,  in  respect  of  time,  it  can  add  mill- 
ions of  years  or  ages  to  millions  of  years  and  ages. 
In  respect  of  extension,  it  can  add  millions  and  bill- 


134  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

ions  and  trillions  of  leagues  to  millions  and  bill- 
ions and  trillions  of  leagues,  and  then  multiply  the 
results  by  each  other,  millions  of  billions  of  trillions 
of  times.  But  when  it  has  finished  this  process,  it 
has  not  infinity  :  it  has' merely  immensity.  If,  when 
we  had  gone  thus  far,  time  and  space  ceased,  we 
should  still  have  the  finite,  —  a  very  wide  finite,  no 
doubt,  but  not  the  infinite.  But  it  is  a  law  of  the 
mind  that,  when  we  have  gone  thus  far,  we  are 
necessitated  to  believe  that  existence  does  not  stop 
there,  —  nay,  to  believe  that,  to  whatever  other  point 
we  might  go,  there  must  be  a  something  beyond. 
Suppose  we  were  carried  to  such  a  point,  w^ould 
w^e  not  stretch  out  our  hand,  confidently  believing 
that  there  is  a  space  be3^ond,  or  that,  if  our  hand  be 
stayed,  it  must  be  by  body  occupying  space?  We 
are  necessitated  to  believe  that,  after  we  have  gone 
thus  far,  we  are  not  at  the  outer  edge  of  the  uni- 
verse of  being,  —  nay,  though  we  were  to  multiply 
this  distance  by  itself,  and  this  by  itself  ten  thou- 
sand millions  of  times,  till  the  imagination  felt  itself 
dizzy,  still,  after  we  have  reached  this  point,  we 
are  constrair^ed  to  believe  that  there  must  be  some- 
thing beyond.  This  seems  to  me  to  be  the  very 
law  of  the  mind  in  reference  to  infinity  :  not  only 
can  it  not  set  limits  to  existence,  it  is  constrained  to 
believe  that  there  are  no  limits.  "  If  the  mind," 
says  John  Foster,  "  were  to  arrive  at  the  solemn 
ridge  of  mountains  which  we  may  fancy  to  bound 
creation,  it  would  eagerly  ask,  Why  no  farther? 
what  is  beyond  ?  " 


PERFECTION   OF   GOD.  135 

But  this  is  only  one  side  of  this  idea  and  con- 
viction :  the  mind  has  another  and  a  more  impor- 
tant. We  apprehend,  and  are  constrained  to  beheve, 
in  regard  to  objects  which  we  look  upon  as  infinite, 
that  they  are  incapable  of  increase  or  diminution. 
We  represent  to  ourselves  the  Divine  Being  with 
certain  attributes,  —  say,  as  wise  or  good,  —  and 
our  belief  as  to  Him  and  these  attributes  is,  that 
he  cannot  be  wiser  or  better.  This  aspect  may 
be  appropriately  designated  as  the  Perfect.  This  is 
the  conviction  of  the  Perfect  of  which  so  many  pro- 
found philosophers  make  so  much;  but  not  more, 
as  I  think,  than  they  are  entitled  to  do.  We  think 
of  God  as  having  all  his  attributes  such  that  no 
addition  could  be  made,  and  we  call  such  attributes 
his  perfections.  In  regard  to  the  moral  attributes 
of  Deity,  it  is  this  significant  word  Perfect,  rather 
than  infinite,  wdiich  expresses  the  conviction  we 
are  led  to  entertain  in  regard,  for  example,  to  the 
wisdoniy  or  benevolence,  or  righteousness  of  God. 
Join  these  two  aspects,  and  we  have  such  an 
idea  as  the  finite  mind  of  man  can  form  of  the 
infinite.  The  first  of  these  views  tends  to  humble 
us,  as  showing  how  far  our  creature  impotency  is 
below  Creator  Power.  The  other  has  rather  a 
tendency  to  elevate  us  by  showing  a  perfect  exem- 
plar. The  Perfect  shines  above  us  like  the  sun 
in  the  heavens,  distant  and  unapproachable,  daz- 
zling and  blinding  us  as  we  would  gaze  upon  it; 
but  still  our  eye  ever  tends  to  turn  up  towards  it, 
and  we  feel  that  it  is  a  blessed  thino-  that  there  is 


136  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

such  a  light,  and  that  we  are  permitted  to  walk  in 
it  and  rejoice  in  it. 

This  seems  to  be  a  necessary  perception :  we 
cannot  be  made  to  believe,  to  think  otherwise.  Not 
only  so  :  it  is  in  a  sense  a  universal  belief.  No 
doubt  the  widest  image  formed  by  many  human 
beings,  as  by  children  and  savages,  must  be  very 
narrow ;  but,  whether  narrow  or  wide,  they  always 
believe  that  there  must  be  something  beyond,  and 
that  this  is  incapable  of  augmentation.  Pursue 
any  line  sufficiently  far,  and  we  shall  find  it  going 
out  into  infinity.     So  true  is  it  that 

The  feeling  of  the  boundless  bounds 
All  feeling  as  the  welkin  doth  the  world. 

But  the  infinite  in  which  the  mind  is  led  intuitively 
to  believe  is  not  an  abstract  infinite.  It  is  a  belief 
in  something  infinite.  When  the  visible  things  of 
God  declare  that  there  is  an  intelligent  Being,  the 
Author  of  all  the  order  and  adaptation  in  the  uni- 
verse, we  are  impelled  to  believe  that  this  Being 
is  and  must  be  infinite ;  and  we  clothe  him  with 
eternal  power  and  godhead.  The  intuition  is 
gratified  to  the  full  in  the  contemplation  of  a 
God  Eternal,  Omnipresent,  All  Mighty,  and  All 
Perfect. 

Thus  it  is  that  I  construct  the  argument  for  the 
existence  of  God ;  and  the  same  considerations 
which  prove  that  he  is,  prove  that  he  has  certain 
perfections.  I  do  not  stand  up  for  a  God-conscious- 
ness as  a  simple  and  single  instinct  gazing  directly 


.     THE   CONVICTION  SPONTANEOUS.  137 

on  God.  I  maintain  that  there  are  a  number  and 
variety  of  native  principles,  each  of  which,  being 
favored  by  external  circumstances,  would  lead  us 
up  to  God.  Every  deeper  principle  which  guides 
us  in  the  practical  affairs  of  life,  and  in  the  pursuit 
of  science,  and  in  our  obligations  towards  our  fel- 
low-men, prompts  us  to  look  upward  to  a  Being 
to  whom  we  stand  in  the  closest  relationship.  The 
law  of  cause  and  effect,  the  law  of  moral  good, 
the  striving  after  the  idea  of  the  infinite,  these  with 
the  circumstances  in  which  we  are  placed,  with  the 
traces  of  purpose  and  providence  and  retribution, 
with  a  generated  sense  of  dependence,  all,  each  in 
its  own  way,  and  all  together  would  draw  or  drive 
our  thoughts  above  nature  to  a  supernatural  power. 
All  the  living  streams  in  our  world,  if  we  ascend, 
them,  conduct  to  the  fountain.  All  the  scattered 
rays  show  us  the  luminary.  I  find  the  materials  of 
the  argument  in  every  work  of  God,  and  the  strings 
that  bind  them  in  the  laws  or  principles  of  knowl- 
edge, belief,  and  judgment.  It  gets  its  nutriment 
from  objects,  and  it  has  its  roots  in  the  mind  itself. 

The  conviction  springs  up  spontaneously  in  all 
minds.  At  the  same  time  it  may  be  repressed  or  it 
maybe  perverted,  —  by  ignorance,  by  sinful  stupid- 
ity, by  lusts,  by  worldly  engrossments;  by  pride, 
indisposing  us  to  submit  to  restraints  ;  by  our  shrink- 
ing instinctively  from  condemnation.  We  can  thus 
account  for  two  things  conjoined  in  the  whole  re- 
ligious history  of  mankind.  We  have  in  all  ages, 
in  all  countries  and  states  of  society,  a  tendency  to 


138  NATURAL    THEOLOG2\ 

believe  in  some  sort  of  supernatural  or  divine  power. 
There  is  no  nation,  in  fact  no  individual,  without 
some  rudiment  of  religion.  Some,  indeed,  have 
declared  that  the\'  have  found  not  only  ptn-sons,  but 
tribes,  without  religion.  And  this  is  true  when  by 
religion  they  mean  a  belief  that  would  be  accepted 
by  civilized  men,  and  involving  a  conception  of  a 
spiritual  God.  But  more  careful  observers,  able  to 
search  the  depths  of  the  heart,  have  always  found 
some  vague  apprehension  of  a  being  or  a  power  sup- 
posed to  be  different  from  the  natural  elements,  and 
fitted  to  raise  up  fear  or   hope.*     But  along  with 

*  In  that  curious  conglomerate,  Sir  John  Lubbock's  book, 
"On  the  Origin  of  Civilization  and  Primitive  Condition  of 
Man,"  there  is  a  heterogeneous  collection  of  statements  by  travel- 
lers, historians,  and  missionaries,  as  to  the  religion  and  moral- 
ity of  savage  nations.  Some  of  the  authors  quoted  are  not  fitted 
to  penetrate  the  depths  of  the  human  heart;  yet  there  is  a  general 
concurrence  as  to  some  sort  of  religious  faith  or  fear  being  found 
among  the  lowest  tribes.  The  Australians  "  possess  certain  vague 
ideas  as  to  the  existence  of  evil  spirits  and  a  general  dread  of 
witchcraft."  The  Backapins,  a  Katiir  tribe,  have  no  outward  wor- 
ship, but  "they  believe  in  sorcery  and  the  efficacy  of  amulets." 
The  Indians  of  California  had  "  certain  sorcerers  whom  they  be- 
lieved to  possess  power  over  diseases,  to  bring  small-pox,  famine, 
&c.,  and  of  whom,  therefore,  they  were  in  much  fear."  The  Hot- 
tentots have  very  vague  ideas  about  a  good  spirit,  but  "  have 
much  clearer  notions  about  an  evil  spirit,  wiiom  they  fear,  believ- 
ing him  to  be  the  occasion  of  sickness,  death,  thunder,  and  every 
calamity  that  befalls  them."  On  Williams  placing  a  Fijian  before 
a  mirror,  he  stood  delighted,  and  said  softly,  "  Now  I  can  see  into 
a  world  of  spirits."  Sir  John  says  that  "certain  phenomena,  as, 
for  instance,  sleep  and  dreams,  pain,  disease,  and  death,  have 
naturally  created  in  the  savage  mind  a  belief  in  the  existence 
of  mysterious  and  invisible  Beings."  This  general  tendency,  I 
add,  must  have  a  commtm  cause  in  the  nature  of  man. 


PERVERTED    VIEWS    OF   GOD.  139 

this  there  is  about  as  universal  a  disposition  to  per- 
vert and  deorrade  the  divine  nature  and  character. 
Some,  from  ignorance  and  narrowness  of  view  and 
heart,  see  God  in  only  a  small  part  of  his  work- 
manship ;  some  only  in  certain  of  his  gifts,  as  in 
rain  and  harvest;  some,  with  a  secret  conscious- 
ness of  sin,  only  in  his  judgments.  The  miscon- 
ception of  his  character  varies  with  the  mind, 
disposition,  and  sympathies  of  the  individual  or  of 
the  nation.  The  light  is  shining  all  around,  and 
each  soul  has  so  far  a  capacity  to  receive  it :  but  each 
receives  only  so  much,  and  rejects  the  rest;  hence 
the  meagre,  the  ridiculous,  the  caricatured  shapes 
and  colors  in  which  God  is  made  to  appear.  Per- 
sons low  in  the  scale  of  intelliorence  make  him  a 
mere  Fetich,  probably  identifying  him  with  certain 
objects  or  powers  which  we  know  to  lie  within  the 
domain  of  nature.  Communities,  with  a  low  moral 
standard,  will  love  to  have  a  God  who  patronizes 
thieving  or  robbery  or  murder.  We  see  the  same 
disposition  working  even  in  civilized  countries. 
The  lover  of  fine  sentiment  clothes  him  in  robes  of 
beauty,  but  takes  no  cognizance  of  his  justice  ;  and 
the  academic  moralist,  declining  to  recognize  the 
existence  of  sin  in  our  world,  paints  him  as  a  being 
of  pure  benevolence  ;  while  the  conscience-stricken 
array  him  in  colors  of  blood.  The  course  of 
religious  history  in  our  world,  under  the  influence 
of  these  two  opposite  forces,  is  thus  a  devious  and 
inconsistent  one,  —  an  inclination  to  believe  in  God 
and  an  inclination  to  misrepresent  him  ;  a  tendency 


140 


JVATUBAL    THEOLOGY. 


to  turn  towards  him,  and  a  tendency  to  turn  away 
from  him  ;  a  disposition  to  receive  him,  but  a  dispo- 
sition to  receive  only  so  much  as  may  suit  or  gratify. 

In  these  Lectures  I  have  traversed  two  worlds, 
that  of  mind  and  that  of  matter,  —  in  too  rapid  a 
manner  I  acknowledge.  My  object  is  gained,  if  I 
have  in  any  measure  succeeded  in  showing  that 
every  part  of  creation  in  the  past  and  in  the  present, 
without  us  and  within  us,  speaks  in  its  own  way, 
in  loud  or  in  low  accents,  in  behalf  of  its  great 
Creator.  The  argument  is  cumulative,  derived  partly 
from  without,  and  partly  from  within,  —  parti}-'  from 
the  external  world,  and  partly  from  the  princi- 
ples of  the  mind.  The  evidence  is  not  so  much 
a  melod}^  as  a  harmony  produced  by  the  union  of 
many  melodies.  The  voice  is  like  the  voice  of 
many  waters  ;  some  soft  as  the  sighing  of  the  gentle 
stream,  others  loud  as  the  roar  of  ocean  sent  forth 
by  ten  thousand  waves.  It  is  like  the  song  which 
ascends  in  heaven  from  a  people  gathered  out  of 
every  tongue  and  nation,  each  chanting  in  his  own 
strain,  but  all  uniting  in  one  melodious  and  harmo- 
nious song.  In  particular  we  are  constrained  to 
believe  that  the  true,  the  lovely,  and  the  holy,  all 
meet  as  in  a  focus  of  surpassing  brilliancy  in  the 
character  of  God.  Wherever  these  are  to  be  found 
in  his  creatures,  they  are  emanations  from  him. 
Thus  our  discussions,  beginning  with  the  creature, 
have  ended  with  the  Creator ;  beginning  with  the 
finite  have  ended  with  the  Infinite  :  beginning  with 


REVIEW  OF  H.    SPENCER.  141 

the  imperfect  have  ended  with  the  Perfect,  —  and 
lead  us  to  Him  in  whom  all  excellence  meets  and 
centres. 

Having  thus  built  up  the  structure,  it  will  be  neces- 
sary to  meet  those  who  assail  it.  You  see  that  I  set 
myself  entirely  against  that  prevailing  style  of  talk 
in  our  day  which  represents  God  as  unknown  and 
unknowable.  It  was  introduced,  unfortunately,  by 
Sir  William  Hamilton,  who  would  make  the  Apostle 
Paul  favor  it  because  he  starts  in  his  argument  from 
an  altar  which  he  had  seen  dedicated  to  the  un- 
known God.  But  Paul  said  expressly  to  the  men 
of  Athens,  to  whom  he  was  speaking,  "Whom 
therefore  ye  ignorantly  worship,  him  declare  I 
(xccTaj'j'flca)  unto  you."  And  in  writing  to  the  Ro- 
mans, he  says,  "The  invisible  things  of  God  from 
the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen" — not  seen 
by  the  eye,  but  by  the  mind;  "being  understood" 
{yoov\iiva^  comprehended  by  the  higher  mind)  "  from 
the  things  that  are  made."  Herbert  Spencer  has 
turned  Hamilton's  rash  expression  to  a  purpose 
never  intended.  Mr.  Spencer  observes,  very  justly 
and  sensibly,  that  "  it  is  rigorously  impossible  to  con- 
ceive that  our  knowledge  is  a  knowledge  of  appear- 
ances only,  without  at  the  same  time  conceiving  a 
reality  of  which  they  are  appearances  ;  for  appear- 
ance without  reality  is   unthinkable."*     This  is  a 

*  "First  Principles,"  2d  ed.,  p.  88.  In  the  Appendix  to  this 
volume  will  be  found  A  Critical  Note  on  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer's 
Speculations. 


142  NATURAL    THEOLOG2'. 

very  important  admission,  of  which  I  mean  to  take 
advantage.  But  then  he  maintains  that  this  reahty 
beyond  the  appearances  must  ever  remain  unknown 
to  man.  It  is  at  this  point  I  meet  him.  He  reckons 
it  the  province  of  science  to  master  the  known 
appearances  ;  and  he  allots  to  religion,  the  sphere 
of  unknown  realities,  that  unascertained  something 
which  phenomena  and  their  relations  imply.  This 
is  the  "fundamental  verity"  common  to  all  relig- 
ions, the  ultimate  religious  truth  of  the  highest 
possible  certainty,  "  that  the  power  which  the 
universe  manifests  to  us  is  utterly  unscrutable."  * 
I  do  not  know  what  religious  profit  Mr.  Spencer 
may  derive  from  meditating  on  this  Unknown, 
whether  he  feels  that  he  should  pay  it  (we  cannot 
say  Him)  any  worship,  or  render  it  any  service,  or 
feel  under  any  obligation  of  duty  to  it ;  or  whether 
it  tends  to  draw  him  to  what  is  good  or  drive  him 
from  what  is  evil.  But  of  this  I  am  sure,  that  if  peo- 
ple generally  should  be  led  to  embrace  his  creed, 
it  would  come  to  mean  that  men  need  not  trouble 
themselves  about  religion,  in  the  darkness  of  which 
no  object  can  be  seen  to  revere  or  to  love.  I  am 
sure  that  if  we  banish  religion  to  this  Siberia,  it 
will  be  to  make  it  perish  in  the  cold.  To  consign 
it  thus  is  to  bury  it  in  the  grave  from  which  it  will 
not  send  forth  even  a  ghost  to  trouble  any  one. 

I  meet  Mr.  Spencer  on  his  own  ground.  I  pro- 
ceed on  his  own  admission.  He  comes  down  to  a 
"fundamental  verity."     He  does  so  on  the  ground 

*  First  Principles,  p.  46. 


CRITICISM  OF  II.    SPENCER. 


143 


of  his  beino-  necessitated  to  assume  it.  He  is  con- 
strained  to  believe  that  there  is  something  beyond 
the  visible  appearances,  and  that  this  is  a  reality  ; 
for  he  says  that  "  appearance  without  reality  is 
unthinkable."  Now  I,  too,  rest  on  a  "fundamental 
verity."  I,  too,  believe  that  there  is  a  something 
beyond  what  falls  under  the  senses  ;  and  that  this 
something  is  real.  But  on  the  same  ground  on 
which  Mr.  Spencer  proceeds,  in  arguing  a  reality 
beyond  our  sensible  experience,  I  proceed  in  main- 
taining that  we  know  that  reality,  so  far  know  it. 
If  the  one  is  a  fundamental  verity,  so  also  is  the 
other.  If  we  are  necessitated  to  believe  the  one, 
we  are  equally  necessitated  to  believe  the  other. 
Or,  rather,  the  "fundamental  verity"  is,  that  we  are 
constrained  to  believe,  not  in  an  unknown  reality, 
but  in  a  known  reality.  The  truth  is,  we  know  this 
something  to  exist,  because  we  so  far  know  it. 

I  have  my  doubts  whether  this  "  fundamental 
verity,"  as  Mr.  Spencer  puts  it,  can  stand  a  sifdng 
examination.  It  embraces  three  clauses:  (i)  that 
there  is  a  something  beyond,  (2)  that  it  is  a  reality, 
and  (3)  that  it  is  unknown  and  unknowable.  He 
is  powerful  in  dogmatic  assertion,  and  there  are 
dependent  minds  that  will  at  once  bend  under  his 
authority  ;  but  there  are  persons  as  independent  as 
he,  who  will  ask  themselves,  and  ask  him,  whether 
he  is  entitled,  on  his  principles,  to  assume  that, 
beyond  what  appears,  there  is  a  something  which 
is  a  reality.  Might  not  the  belief  have  sprung  up 
without  a   cause  ?     Or,  if  Mr.   Spencer  admit  the 


144  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

principle  that  every  effect  has  a  cause,  he  must 
seek  for  other  causes,  which,  as  they  are  brought 
in,  may  destroy  the  whole  symmetry  of  his  system, 
and  turn  this  unknown  into  a  known  cause.  Or, 
might  not  this  belief  have  been  produced  by  heredi- 
tary descent  from  some  instinct  of  our  ancestors 
among  the  lower  animals  ?  And  what  proof  is 
there,  or  can  there  be,  that  this  unknown  something 
is  a  reality,  —  is  any  thing  more  than  a  belief  ?  Of 
this  I  am  sure,  that  Mr.  Spencer's  followers  will 
care  nothing  for  this  something  beyond,  for  this  un- 
known something.  They  will  say  that,  if  we  know 
and  can  know  nothing  of  its  nature,  it  is  a  matter  of 
no  moment  whether  it  exists  or  not ;  that  the  admis 
sion  can  carry  with  it  no  practical  consequences  for 
instruction,  for  comfort,  or  for  admonition.  If  this 
be  so,  then  this  region  w^hich  Mr.  Spencer  has  so 
kindly  allotted  to  religion,  and  in  w^hich  all  relig- 
ions may  meet  —  in  the  dark  —  vanishes  ;  and  man- 
kind will  not  miss  it,  there  being  extremely  little 
difference  to  us  between  absolute  nothing,  and 
the  absolutely  unknowable.  But  Mr.  Spencer  is 
completely  mistaken,  consciousness  being  wit- 
ness, as  to  the  nature  and  character  of  this  fun- 
damental verity,  which,  when  properly  interpreted, 
is,  that  we  know  things  appearing  ;  and  on  princi- 
ples which  can  be  specified  and  defended,  as,  for 
instance,  on  the  principle  of  causation,  we  argue 
that  these  things  appearing,  being  real,  imply 
other  things  also  real,  though  not  appearing  to 
the  senses. 


W£    CAN  COME    TO  KNOW  GOD.  145 

The  school  against  which  I  am  arguing  do  not 
profess  to  deny  the  existence  of  God :  this,  they 
say,  would  be  unphilosophical ;  it  would  be  as 
unphilosophical  to  deny  as  to  affirm  any  thing  as 
to  a  teri'a  incognita.  What  they  hold  is,  that  if  he 
exist,  he  must  be  unknown.  But,  towards  an  abso- 
lutely unknown  being  we  can  cherish  no  affection ; 
and  we  do  not  feel  as  if  he  could  have  any  claim 
upon  us  for  service  or  obedience.  To  look  on  this 
object  is  merely  to  gaze  upon  the  darkness  without 
a  point  of  light  to  cheer  us.  It  can  supply  no  high 
ideal  after  which  to  mould  our  character.  From 
such  a  God,  if  he  deserve  the  name,  we  can  draw 
no  sympathy  in  our  sorrows,  no  help  in  our  weak- 
ness. From  him  we  can  derive  no  hopes  to  cheer, 
though  I  can  conceive  that  he  might  raise  some 
fears  of  evil,  to  come  we  know  not  when  or  how. 

Now,  I  meet  all  this  by  showing  that  we  are 
capable  of  knowing,  and  that  what  we  know  is  a 
reality.  From  what  we  know  directly,  we  can  rise 
to  the  knowledge  of  other  things.  We  cannot  look 
immediately  into  the  souls  of  our  neighbors;  but 
we  infer  that  they  exist,  and  can  learn  much  of 
their  character  from  what  we  see  them  do.  We 
may  not  have  been  in  India  or  China  ourselves  ;  but 
we  know  much  about  these  countries,  from  the 
reports  brought  us  by  travellers.  I  allow  that  we 
are  not  directly  conscious  of  God,  any  more  than 
we  are  of  our  fellow-men ;  but  we  legitimately  infer 
his  character  from  the  works  of  creation  and  provi- 
dence, and  the  revelation  he  has  made  of  himself 

7 


146  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

in  his  Word.  We  cannot  know  the  world  to  come 
by  visiting  it ;  but  we  know  what  it  must  be  from 
the  character  of  God,  and  the  moral  laws  by  which 
he  governs  the  universe. 

A  thing,  I  hold,  can  be  known  by  its  effects. 
Most  of  the  things  we  know  are  known  to  us 
simply  by  what  they  do.  We  know  the  sun  and 
stars ;  we  know  that  distant  house  and  hill ;  not 
directly,  but  as  reflecting  rays  of  light  which  reach 
our  eyes.  There  is  a  man  we  have  never  seen : 
but  we  know  him  to  be  eloquent  from  his  speeches 
which  we  have  read ;  to  be  benevolent,  from  his 
deeds  of  charity  ;  to  be  truthful,  from  his  continuing 
in  the  path  of  integrity  when  he  might  have  been 
tempted  to  swerve  from  it.  In  like  manner,  we 
can  come  to  know  God  from  his  works  :  know  him 
to  be  powerful,  from  the  traces  of  power  every- 
where visible ;  to  be  good,  from  the  provision  made 
for  the  happiness  of  his  creatures ;  and  to  be  just, 
from  his  mode  of  government.  The  real  effects  in 
nature  carry  us  up  to  a  real  cause  above  nature. 
We  recognize  him,  not  as  the  unknown  cause,  but 
as  the  known  cause  of  known  effects.  We  clothe 
him  with  varied  attributes,  so  as  to  make  him  capa- 
ble of  producing  the  varied  effects  we  discover. 
The  evidences  of  design  argue  an  adequate  cause 
in  an  intelligent  designer ;  the  traces  of  beneficent 
contrivance  show  that  he  is  animated  by  love  ;  and 
the  nature  of  the  moral  power  in  man,  and  of  the 
moral  government  of  the  world,  is  a  proof  of  the 
existence  of  a  Moral  Governor. 


WB  KNOW   GOD   BT  HIS    WORKS. 


147 


We  know  all  created  things  better,  from  the  very 
circumstance  that  we  know  God  as  their  author. 
Aristotle  uttered  a  profound  truth  when  he  said  we 
know  things  in  their  causes.*  The  truth  is,  we  can 
scarcely  be  said  to  have  a  full  knowledge  of  a  thing 
till  we  know  its  causes.  I  hold  that  we  have  a  very 
imperfect  knowledge  of  the  works  of  nature  till  we 
view  them  as  works  of  God,  —  not  only  as  works 
of  mechanism,  but  works  of  intelligence;  not  only 
as  under  laws,  but  under  a  law-giver,  wise  and 
good. 

True,  we  do  not  know  all  about  God.  We  know, 
after  all,  only  a  part;  but,  "we  know  in  part," 
and  what  we  know  is  truth,,  so  far  as  it  goes. 
"  Clouds  and  darkness  are  round  about  him ;  right- 
eousness and  judgment  are  the  habitation  of  his 
throne."  The  truth  is,  there  is  no  object  with  which 
we  have  such  ample  means  of  becoming  acquainted. 
We  cannot  open  our  eyes  without  discovering  his 
workmanship.  We  cannot  inspect  any  part  of 
nature  without  contemplating  in  the  very  act  his 
ways  of  procedure.  We  are  ever,  whether  we 
acknowledge  it  or  not,  recipients  of  his  bounty. 
There  is  no  being,  excepting  ourselves,  with  whom 
we  come  into  more  immediate  and  frequent  contact. 
We  know  only  in  part,  because  of  his  infinity  and 
our  finity ;  but  to  know  a  very  little  of  him  is  to 
know  much.  As  Paul  told  the  men  of  Athens, 
"  He  giveth  to  all  life  and  breath,  and  all  things," 

*  Tore  yap  eldevai  (j)a{i.EV  ekugtov,  orav  tjjv  TzpojTTjv  ahiav  olu/xeda  -yvupi- 
^eiv.  —  Metaphysics^  B.  I.  c.  iii. 


148  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

and  he  is  "  not  far  from  every  one  of  us  :  for  in  him 
we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our  being,  as  certain 
also  of  your  own  poets  have  said,  For  we  are  c.lso  his 
oflspring."  We  know  enough  to  gain  our  faith  ;  to 
inspire  our  confidence ;  to  kindle  our  love ;  to  awe 
us  in  the  time  of  prosperity  w^hen  we  might  be 
tempted  to  become  vain,  proud,  and  presumptuous  ; 
and  to  sustain  us  in  all  the  critical  positions  of  life 
and  the  dark  dispensations  of  providence. 

It  requires  to  be  added  that  as  most  errors  con- 
tain some  truth,  as  all  prevalent  errors  contain  a 
sufficient  amount  of  truth  to  make  them  plausible,  so 
we  ma}^  discover  some  truth  even  in  the  meagre 
fundamental  principle  of  Spencer.  I  must  ever 
hold  that  we  can  come  to  know  God  :  still  he  is  to 
a  great  extent  unknown.  '^  Canst  thou  by  search- 
ing find  out  God?  canst  thou  find  out  the  Almighty 
unto  perfection?  It  is  as  high  as  heaven  ;  what  canst 
thou  do?  deeper  than  hell ;  what  canst  thou  know?  " 
We  can  so  far  apprehend  him ;  but,  to  use  an  old 
distinction,  we  cannot  comprehend  him.  We  know 
him  as  we  know  the  ocean  when  we  stand  upon  its 
shores  :  w^hat  we  see  is  the  ocean,  but  not  the  whole 
ocean,  which  stretches  beyond  our  ken.  This  arises 
mainly  from  our  limited  capacity;  but  partly,  also, 
it  may  be,  because  of  our  pollution,  as  not  capable 
of  reflecting  the  full  brightness  of  God.  It  is  clear 
that  God  has  attributes  like  ours  ;  for,  by  the  powers 
with  which  he  has  endowed  us,  we  can  produce 
effects  like  those  we  see  produced  by  him  in 
nature.     We  have  been  formed  in  his  likeness,  and 


GOD   SO   FAR    UNKNOWN.  1 49 

can  thus  understand  those  qualities  in  Him  which 
are  like  those  he  hath  been  pleased  to  commu- 
nicate to  us.  But,  even  as  to  these,  the  attributes 
which  are  limited  in  us  are  infinite  in  him,  and  can- 
not be  grasped  by  us  who  are  finite.  But  there  is 
more  than  this  involved  in  our  ignorance.  There 
is  another  and  deeper  sense  in  which  God  is  un- 
known. We  discover  effects  in  nature  which  we 
must  refer  to  a  sovereign  power  that  must  ever 
remain  a  mystery  to  us  in  this  world.  God  seems 
to  possess  perfections  differing  not  only  in  degree 
but  in  kind  from  any  thing  possessed  by  man.  The 
blind  man  cannot  form  the  most  distant  idea  of 
colors,  nor  the  deaf  man  of  music;  so  there  may 
be  attributes  of  God  of  which  we  cannot  form  the 
dimmest  conception,  differing  as  much  from  any 
thing  we  have  experienced,  as  colors  do  from 
sounds,  as  mind  does  from  body.  It  is  in  this  high 
region  that  we  place  the  mysteries  of  the  decrees 
of  God,  of  the  origin  of  evil,  and  such  doctrines  as 
that  of  the  Trinity.  Is  not  this  the  very  view  that 
is  given  in  Scripture  where  he  is  described  as  known 
and  yet  unknown?  "  The  invisible  things  are  clearly 
seen,  being  understood  from  the  things  that  are 
made."  "Yet  verily  thou  art  a  God  that  hidest  thy- 
self." All  this  is  suited  to  our  nature,  to  its  strength 
and  to  its  weakness.  If  God  were  all  darkness,  we 
could  look  upon  him  only  with  an  ignorant  terror : 
if  he  were  all  light,  he  might  dazzle  us  by  excess  of 
brightness.  As  it  is,  we  are  led  at  once  to  revere 
and  to  love  him.     We  instinctively  avoid  the  open, 


150  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

uninteresting  plain,  with  the  long,  straight  road 
leading  through  it,  from  which  we  see  at  once  all 
we  ever  can  see ;  and  we  prefer  the  country  with 
hill  and  dale,  with  open  lawn  and  forest,  with  light 
and  shade,  where  w^e  ever  get  glimpses  of  new 
objects  and  see  them  in  distant  perspective.  It  is 
from  a  like  principle  that  we  delight  to  lose  our- 
selves in  the  contemplation  of  the  mysteries  of  the 
divine  nature,  in  which  there  is  the  brightest  light, 
and  yet  enough  of  darkness  to  awe  us  into  rever- 
ence, and  subdue  us  into  a  sense  of  dependence. 
God  may  truly  be  described  as  the  Being  of  whom 
we  know  the  most,  inasmuch  as  we  cannot  open 
our  eyes  without  looking  on  the  operations  of  his 
hands,  and  we  see  more  of  his  works  and  ways 
than  of  the  works  and  ways  of  any  other ;  and  yet 
He  is  the  Being  of  whom  we  know  the  least,  as 
we  know  comparatively  less  of  his  whole  nature  than 
we  do  of  ourselves,  or  of  our  fellow-men,  or  of  any 
object  falling  under  our  notice  in  this  world.  They 
who  know  most  of  him  in  earth  or  heaven  know 
that  they  know  little  after  all ;  but  they  know  that 
they  may  know  more  and  more  of  him  throughout 
eternal  ages. 


VI. 


Progress  of  Free  Thought  in  America.  —  Rationalism. 
—  Boston  Theology.  —  Positivism. 

T  KEEP  it  before  me  throughout  these  Lectures, 
"*•  that  I  am  addressing  young  men  who  have  been 
thrown  into  the  current  of  the  times ;  who  must 
swim  wdth  it,  or  resist  .it,  or,  better  still,  seek  to 
guide  it.  I  presume  that  you  look,  from  time  to 
time,  into  the  literary  organs  of  the  day,  and  that 
you  have  heard  of,  and  may  have  to  take  your  part 
—  by  act,  vote,  or  speech  —  in,  the  questions  dis- 
cussed. You  wash  to  be  able  to  form  a  sound  judg- 
ment, each  for  himself,  and  then  take  your  position, 
and  act  your  part  intelligently,  charitably,  wisely, 
courageously,  in  the  eventful  and  critical  era  in 
which  your  lot  has  been  cast. 

In  the  Lectures  already  delivered,  I  have  laid 
down  what  I  believe  to  be  the  right  positions,  and 
defended  them  to  the  best  of  my  ability,  and  as 
fully  as  my  limited  space  allowed.  I  feel  that  I 
must  now  apply  them,  in  the  good  old  way  of  Puri- 
tan preaching,  to  the  circumstances  in  which  the 
students  in  this  Seminary  are  placed.'  I  cannot 
forget  what  are  your  surroundings,  as  you  are  pur- 


152  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

suing  your  education  in  this  country  in  an  age  in 
which  old  thought  is  being  thoroughly  sifted.  I  have 
now  to  surve}^  the  history  and  the  state  of  opinion 
in  America  :  this  I  would  do  in  no  harsh  or  narrow 
manner,  but  in  order  to  estimate  with  candor  the 
influences  under  which  you  may  have  to  form  your 
opinions  and  decide  on  your  line  of  conduct. 

In  doing  so,  it  will  be  necessary  to  take  a  look 
at  the  nature  and  progress  of  the  new  opinions 
which  have  been  opposing  or  seeking  to  undermine 
the  old.  But,  in  order  to  this,  you  must  take  an 
excursion  with  me  into  New  England,  and  pay  a 
visit  to  Boston,  which  has  exercised  such  an  influ- 
ence on  the  literature  and  theology  of  America, — 
on  literature  altogether  for  good ;  and  on  theology, 
whether  for  good  or  for  evil,  we  must  now  seek 
to  determine.  We  must,  in  particular,  follow  the 
progress  of  what  has  been  called  the  Boston  Theol- 
ogy ;  for  there  is  a  Boston  Theology,  just  as  there 
has  been  a  Genevan  Theology,  a  Wesleyan  Theol- 
ogy, and  an  Oxford  Theology. 

I  feel  as  if  I  were  familiar  with  the  Boston  Theol- 
ogy. It  is  known  not  only  here,  but  has  a  name 
in  Europe.  There  were  anticipations  of  it  in  Old 
England,  and  all  over  New  England ;  but  it  was 
Dr.  Channing  who  first  brought  it  under  the  notice 
of  the  world.  Of  the  illustrious  man  now  named, 
no  one  should  allow  himself  to  speak  except  with 
profound  reverence.  His  style  —  with  a  little  too 
much  of  glitter  and  of  rhetoric  at  times  —  is  worthy 
of  being  compared  with  that  of  Macaulay .   His  essay 


CHANNING.  153 

on  the  character  of  Napoleon  has  a  higher  tone 
than  any  thing  Macaulay  ever  wrote,  and  is  one  of 
the  noblest  specimens  of  moral  criticism  which  we 
have  in  the  English  language.  His  firm  and  con- 
sistent opposition  to  slavery  is  a  continued  rebuke  of 
the  conduct  of  many  chicken-hearted  or  time-serv- 
ing Evangelicals,  who  are  loud  enough  now  in  their 
denunciations,  but  could  keep  wonderfully  quiet  an 
age  ago,  and  ever  said  hush,  when  the  troublesome 
subject  was  started.  To  his  credit,  so  I  reckon  it, 
he  stuck  by  the  inspiration  of  Scripture,  as  I  under- 
stand it,  and  has  left  us  defences  of  the  Word  of 
God  as  true  as  they  are  eloquent.  But  everybody 
sees  that  he  has  failed  to  prove  that  Socinianism  or 
Unitarianism  is  in  the  Bible,  in  the  letter  or  in  the 
spirit  of  it.  Whatever  may  be  found  in  the  Word 
of  God,  it  is  clear  that  rationalism  is  not  there. 
Paul  is  certainly  no  rationalist,  when  he  proclaims 
that  Jesus  held  it  no  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God  ; 
that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith ;  and  that  Jesus 
died  for  sinners,  —  the  just  for  the  unjust.  John  is 
certainly  no  rationalist  when  he  declares  that  the 
Logos,  which  was  with  God  and  was  God,  became 
flesh,  and  shows  us  a  way  by  which  we  may  rise 
through  him  to  fellowship  with  God;  and,  "truly, 
our  fellowship  is  with  the  Father,  and  with  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ."  And,  surely,  Jesus  is  no  rationalist, 
when  he,  the  meekest  and  the  most  trul}^  humble  of 
all  men  that  have  appeared  on  earth,  could  say  so 
calmly,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one,"  and  when  the 
Jews  were  proclaiming,  "  No  one  can  forgive  sin  but 

7* 


154  NATURAL    THEOLOG2. 

God  only,"  could  command,  "Thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee."  The  Old  Testament  shadow  going  before 
the  substance,  and  telling  of  its  approach  dimly  and 
yet  clearly,  is  certainly  not  rationalism.  So  opin- 
ion could  not  stay  at  the  place  to  which  Channing 
conducted  it.  Those  who  in  these  times  keep  his 
position  are  made  to  feel  that  they  are  left  high  and 
dry  upon  a  sandy  beach,  to  which  he  had  floated 
them,  but  from  which  they  are  not  likely  to  be  deliv- 
ered by  any  subsequent  wave  rising  to  their  relief. 

So  a  bolder  and  more  out-spoken  thinker  ap- 
peared :  a  man  somewhat  too  self-dependent  and 
self-conscious,  but  courageous  and  ever  ready  to 
defend  the  weak  against  the  strong,  and  to  run  to  the 
rescue  of  suffering  humanity.  He  does  not  affect  to 
derive  what  doctrine  he  held  from  the  Bible  ;  and  all 
men  felt  that  he  was  right  there.  His  creed  is  not 
to  be  found  in  the  Old  Testament  with  its  sacrificial 
types  ;  or  in  the  New  Testament  with  a  bloody  cross 
on  its  title-page  ;  in  the  unworldly  discourses  of  Jesus 
recommending  meekness,  self-denial,  the  casting 
away  of  our  own  righteousness,  and  trust  in  God; 
or  the  elaborate  exposition  of  an  atonement  in  the 
epistles  of  Paul.  His  mother,  living  in  the  declining 
age  of  Puritanism,  — when  its  life  had  withered  and 
only  its  bare  stalks  were  left,  like  stubble  after  the 
grain  had  been  cut  down,  —  recommended  :  "  In  my 
earliest  boyhood  I  was  taught  to  respect  the  instinc- 
tive promptings  of  conscience,  regarding  it  as  the 
voice  of  God  in  the  soul  of  man,  which  must  always 
be  obeyed ;  to  speak  the  truth  without  evasion  or 


THEODORE  PARKER. 


155 


concealment;  to  love  justice  and  conform  to  it; 
to  reverence  merit  in  all  men,  and  that  regardless 
of  their  rank  or  reputation ;  and,  above  all  things,  I 
v^as  taught  to  love  and  trust  the  dear  God."  All 
good,  we  say,  only  this  conscience  needs  to  be 
quickened,  enlightened  by  the  revealed  word  of 
God,  and  strengthened  in  its  contest  with  sin  in  the 
heart  by  the  God  who  planted  it  there.  This  ardent 
man  was  not  satisfied  with  the  creed  of  his  party,  so 
like  a  winter  day,  cold,  colorless,  so  soon  setting 
in  freezing  night.  "  Their  cry  was  ever  '  duty,  duty, 
work,  work  ; '  but  they  failed  to  address  with  equal 
power  the  soul,  and  did  not  also  shout  'joy,  joy  ! 
delight,  delight ! ' "  "  Their  water  was  all  laboriously 
pumped  up  from  deep  wells.  It  did  not  gush  out 
leaping  from  the  great  spring.  That  is  indeed  on 
the  surface  of  the  sloping  ground,  feeding  the  little 
streams  that  run  among  the  hills,  and  both  quench- 
ing the  wild  asses'  thirst,  and  watering  also  the 
meadows,  newly  mown,  but  which  yet  comes  from 
the  Rock  of  Ages,  and  is  pressed  out  by  the  cloud- 
compelling  mountains  that  rest  thereon  :  yes,  by  the 
gravitation  of  the  earth  itself;  yes,  by  the  gravi- 
tation of  the  earth  itself."  "I  thought  they  lacked 
the  deep  internal  feeling  of  piety  which  alone  could 
make  feeling  lasting.  Certainly  they  had  not  that 
most  joyous  of  all  delights.  This  fact  seemed  clear  in 
their  sermons,  their  prayers,  and  even  in  the  hymns 
they  made,  borrowed,  or  adopted."  "  It  is  a  dismal 
fault  in  a  religious  party  this  lack  of  piety,  and 
dismally  have  the  Unitarians  answered  it !  "    "  Their 


156  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

creed  was  only  a  denial  always  trembling  before  the 
Orthodox."  This  did  not  suit  the  strong,  impulsive 
nature  of  the  man ;  and  so  he  must  construct  a  re- 
ligion for  himself.  It  was  what  he  called  an  Abso- 
lute Religion,  which  belongs  to  man's  nature.  He 
rejected  the  sensationalism,  so  earthl}^  of  the  old 
Unitarian  school,  and  betook  himself  to  intuitions, 
which  seem  to  carry  him  up  to  the  heavens,  and 
actually  took  him  up  to  the  clouds.  He  drew  his 
system  (i)  from  the  instinctive  intuition  of  the 
Divine,  the  consciousness  that  there  is  a  God;  (2) 
The  instinctive  intuition  of  the  just  and  right, 
a  consciousness  that  there  is  a  moral  law,  inde- 
pendent of  our  will,  which  we  ought  to  keep ; 
(3)  The  instinctive  intuition  of  the  immortal,  a 
consciousness  that  the  essential  element  of  man, 
the  principle  of  individuality,  never  dies.  He  got 
the  inspiration  which  led  to  all  this  from  the  works 
of  Carlyle  and  Coleridge,  reprinted  in  America, 
and  reviews  and  translations  of  Cousin,  and  longed 
earnestly  to  get  aid  from  the  destructive  Biblical 
criticism  and  the  constructive  a  -priori  philosophy 
of  Germany,  which  aid  he  never  got;  for  the 
Germans  thought  his  religion  very  irreligious,  and 
his  rationalism  ver}'  irrational.  But  when  they 
heard  these  utterances,  the  young  men  of  Boston  — 
that  is,  men  who  were  young  thirty  or  forty  years 
ago  —  shouted,  and  flung  up  their  hats  in  the  air, 
and  said,  Channing  is  setting  as  the  sun  on  a  win- 
ter da}^  but  Theodore  Parker  is  rising  like  the  sun 
on  a  spring  morning. 


INTUITIONALISM.  1 5  7 

The  icy,  the  frigid,  and  rigid  rationalism  of  the 
winter  now  came  to  be  dissolved  in  the  heat  of  a 
warmer  season,  and  your  fathers  had  a  time  of  wad- 
ing deep  in  melting  matter.  It  is  now  acknowledged 
that  the  logical  processes  of  definition  and  reason- 
ing can  do  little  in  religion  :  and  those  who  in  the 
previous  age  would  have  appealed  to  these  now  called 
in  something  livelier,  —  Feeling,  Belief,  Inspiration  ; 
in  one  word.  Intuition.  In  the  age  then  passing 
away,  "excelsior"  youths  were  like  to  be  starved 
in  cold  ;  in  the  age  which  succeeded,  they  are  in 
greater  danger  of  having  the  seeds  of  wasting 
disease  fostered  by  lukewarm  damps  and  gilded 
vapors.  The  appeal  was  to  faith,  feeling,  intuition. 
But  what  were  men  to  believe  in?  Did  any  two 
men  agree  in  their  feelings?  Are  we  quite  certain 
when  we  have  intuition  and  when  we  have  not  intu- 
ition? The  arbiter  was  too  vague  in  its  utterances 
to  teach  certainty,  to  secure  assurance,  or  even  to 
gain  general  consent.  A  dreamer  appeared  as  the 
representative  of  this  period,  getting  the  material 
of  his  dreams  from  Goethe  and  Thomas  Carlyle, 
but  ever  colored  with  the  hues  of  his  own  peculiar 
genius.  He  is  thus  introduced  by  Theodore  Parker  : 
"The  brilliant  genius  of  Emerson  rose  in  the  winter 
night  and  hung  over  Boston,  drawing  the  eyes  of 
ingenuous  young  people  to  look  to  that  great  new 
star,  and  a  beauty  and  a  mystery  which  charmed 
for  the  moment,  while  it  gave  also  perennial  instruc- 
tion, as  it  led  them  forward  along  new  paths  and 
towards    new  hopes.     America   has   seen  no  such 


158  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

sight  before."  "A  beauty  and  a  mystery,"  I  admit, 
"which  charms  for  the  moment."  If  I  were  inclined 
to  believe  in  dreams  of  any  kind,  I  would  as  readily 
believe  in  Emerson's  as  in  any  others.  The  visions 
seen  by  De  Quincey,  the  opium-eater,  are  not  more 
beautiful.  Coming  from  such  a  soul  they  must  con- 
tain truth,  some  of  it  welling  up  from  the  deepest 
intuitions  of  the  mind  as  from  a  fresh,  clear  foun- 
tain. Some  are  the  unconscious  reflection  of  the 
light  shining  from  the  Word  of  God  in  a  Christian 
land.  Others  are  to  be  read,  like  dreams,  by  con- 
traries. The  oracles  which  he  utters  are  often  capa- 
ble of  a  double  meaning ;  and  men  will  interpret 
them  to  suit  their  purpose.  And  what,  after  all,  am 
I  to  think  and  believe  about  God  and  the  soul  and 
the  world  to  come,  and  of  the  way  of  rising  to  com- 
munion with  God  and  the  enjoyments  of  heaven? 
is  the  question  which  is  often  put  to  me  by  young 
men,  after  reading  Emerson's  papers  ;  and  I  have  to 
tell  them  that  Mr.  Emerson  must  answer  them,  for 
I  cannot. 

About  thirty  years  ago,  when  men  now  fifty  years 
of  age  were  boys  at  college,  they  believed  that 
something  great  and  good  and  stable  was  to  come 
out  of  a  showy  Intuitionalism,  as  I  call  it,  which 
drew  all  truth  out  of  the  depths  of  the  soul.  Men 
like  Goethe  and  Coleridge  and  Carlyle,  and  their 
admirers  in  Great  Britain  and  America,  looked  so 
profound  and  threw  out  such  mysterious  utterances 
of  their  being  able  —  if  only  they  chose  —  to  divulge 
something  very  profound,  that  earnest  and  confiding 


GOETHE  AND    CARLTLE.  159 

youths  believed  in  them.  But  somehow  or  other 
they  never  chose  :  some  of  us  think,  because  they 
had  nothing  to  utter.  Though  often  pressed  to 
expound  their  secret,  they  have  always  shunned 
doing  so ;  and  people  begin  to  suspect  that  there 
is  nothing  in  it.  There  was  an  expectation,  long 
entertained  by  many,  that  something  better  than  the 
old  Christianity  of  the  Bible,  literally  inteipreted, 
might  come  out  of  the  great  German  philosophic 
systems  of  Kant,  Fichte,  Schelling,  Hegel,  and 
Schleiermacher  ;  but  these  hopes  have  been  doomed 
to  acknowledged  disappointment.  Coleridgt  has 
played  out  his  tune,  sweet  and  irregular  as  the  harp 
of  u^olus  ;  and  all  men  perceive  that  he  never  had 
any  thing  to  meet  the  deeper  wants  of  humanity, 
except  what  he  drew  from  the  songs  of  Zion.  It 
has  long  been  clear  in  regard  to  Goethe,  and  is  now 
being  seen  in  regard  to  Carlyle,  that  neither  of 
them  ever  had  any  thing  positive  to  furnish  in 
religion,  and  that  all  they  had  to  utter  was  blankly 
negative  ;  and  I  rather  think  that  the  last  hope  of 
deriving  any  thing  soul-satisfying  from  such  quar- 
ters has  vanished  from  the  minds  of  those  who 
have  been  impressed  with  their  genius. 

The  spirit  is  still  lingering  in  certain  circles  of 
America,  and  it  clothes  itself  at  times  in  such  beau- 
tiful forms  that  I  am  inclined  to  admire  it,  as  I  do 
the  clouds  in  the  evening  sky,  convinced  though  I 
be,  all  the  while,  that  they  are  mere  vapors,  and 
soon  to  fade  into  dulness  and  gloom.  As  to  the 
intuitionalism,    which    rose    out    of   rationalism    as 


l6o  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

fogs  rise  out  of  the  melted  ice,  it  is  acknowledged 
that  it  is  not  rational.  No  man  can  draw  Parker's 
creed  —  a  creed  noble  in  so  many  respects  —  out  of 
human  reason,  any  more  than  he  could  derive  Chan- 
ning's  creed  out  of  the  Scriptures.  One-half  of 
all  that  is  noble  was  drawn  through  a  noble  mother 
out  of  the  Bible,  is  in  fact  the  reflection  of  the  light 
which  is  diffused  all  throughout  the  atmosphere  in 
a  Christian  country  while  the  sun  is  shining,  but 
without  persons  being  conscious  of  the  source  from 
which  it  comes.  The  other  half  has  come  from  a 
heart  with  noble  instincts,  but  cannot  stand  the  sift- 
incT  examination  of  the  reason.  There  is  no  arbiter 
provided  to  decide  what  we  should  accept,  and  what 
we  should  reject.  In  constructing  a  rational  theol- 
ogy, these  men,  to  use  an  expression  of  Lessing's, 
have  constructed  an  irrational  philosophy.  The 
stratum  which  promised  to  be  so  auriferous  is  becom- 
ing thin,  and  is  ready  to  crop  out  to  the  surface, 
and  terminate  its  existence,  or  at  least  the  hopes 
which  men  entertained  regarding  it. 

To  what  is  the  appeal  to  lie?  The  old  and  cold 
reason  of  the  antiquated  Unitarians?  None  so  ready 
as  the  men  of  the  new  school  to  denounce  the  heart- 
less natural  theolog}^  of  the  old  rational  school. 
Every  one  sees  how  flickering  a  light  the  reason, 
in  the  sense  of  the  lo<j^ical  understandinor  and  the 

O  CD 

reasoning  process,  can  throw  an  the  grand  problems 
of  religion,  which  the  heart  insists  upon  having 
solved.  "  Suflicient,"  as  Bacon  says,  "  to  convince 
of  atheism,  but  not  to  inform  relio-ion." 


IS    THE  APPEAL    TO   SCIENCE  P  l6l 

To  what  then  is  the  appeal  to  be?  To  science, 
say  some.  To  what  science?  To  physical  science? 
Physical  science  has  its  own  grand  domain,  wide 
as  the  telescope  or  spectroscope  can  penetrate  ;  but 
among  all  its  atoms,  earths,  and  stars,  it  discovers 
nothing  to  throw  light  on  the  great  questions  started 
as  to  the  relation  in  which  man  stands  to  God,  and 
the  existence  of  the  soul  after  death.  All  our  wiser 
expounders  of  science  confess  this.  And  the  scien- 
tific school,  which  is  specially  guiding  these  men, 
is  ever  taking  pains  to  show  that  science  should 
avoid  such  questions,  as  liaving  no  light  to  shed 
upon  them.  A  Lecturer  in  Boston  allows  that,  at 
present,  science  cannot  answer  the  question  as  to 
the  immortality  of  the  soul,  but  "  from  the  future, 
not  the  past,  must  the  light  come  ;  "  and  he  seems  to 
indicate  that  it  must  be  "  untold  years  "  before  it  can 
come  to  this.  Verily,  it  is  poor  consolation  to  the 
mother,  mourning  over  her  boy  removed  by  death, 
to  assure  her  that,  some  millions  of  years  hence, 
science  will  settle  the  question  as  to  whether  she 
may  ever  expect  to  meet  her  son  in  another  world ; 
and  science  will  have  to  add  that  all  things  are 
approaching  nearer  to  that  cold  in  which  all 
life  is  to  perish,  to  be  followed  by  a  conflict  and 
conflagration  in  which  all  things  are  to  be  ab- 
sorbed. 

But  the  same  lecturer  hints,  and  another  lecturer 
states  plainly,  that  what  physical  science  cannot 
establish,  what  the  alleged  resurrection  of  Jesus 
cannot  prove,    may  be   founded    on   certain   moral 


1 62  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

ideas,  on  a  sense  of  virtue  and  moral  obligation, 
by  the  faculties  which  distinguish  between  right  and 
wrong.  But,  meanwhile,  they  are  aware  that  the 
school  which  can  generate  life,  and  plants,  and 
animals,  and  man,  out  of  star  dust,  can  develop 
these  ideas,  by  natural  law,  out  of  sensations  and 
impressions.  I  believe  that  we  are  entitled  to  appeal 
to  these  ideas  in,  constructing  a  reasonable  religious 
conviction.  I  am  sure  that  the  arguments  employed 
by  Mr.  Mill  and  Mr.  Bain  to  undermine  these  ideas 
can  be  answered,  just  as  the  arguments  against 
final  cause  can  be  answered.  Along  with  the  traces 
of  design  in  the  universe,  and  other  first  or  funda- 
mental truths,  such  as  that  of  cause  and  effect,  these 
ideas  do  conduct  us  to  a  belief  in  God.  I  am  truly 
glad  to  find  the  most  advanced  of  the  Boston  school 
still  cleaving  to  these  grand  moral  principles. 
Finding  in  these  ideas  ground  on  w^hich  they  feel 
that  they  can  stand  and  stay,  they  may  be  allured 
to  look  back  and  retrace  their  steps.  I  do  hope 
this  of  some  of  them  who  are  evidently  dissatisfied 
with  their  position,  and  afraid  of  the  termination  of 
the  path  on  which  they  have  entered.  But  when 
these  moral  ideas  are  adopted,  they  must  be  consist- 
ently followed  out.  And  when  they  are  carried  out 
logically,  when  the  intimations  of  conscience  and 
the  sense  of  sin  are  carefully  looked  at  and  weighed, 
they  give  a  very  different  view  of  God  from  that 
which  is  taken  in  the  new  theology,  and  tend  to 
bring  them  back,  and  settle  them  upon  the  old 
foundations. 


THE  APPEAL    TO  FAITH.  163 

But  In  the  mean  time  the  appeal  of  these  men  is  to 
the  faith,  to  the  feehngs.  But  if  there  be  no  truth 
set  before  the  faith,  it  may  become  the  weakest 
credulity  ;  and  as  to  the  feelings,  they  may  change 
quicker  than  the  phases  of  the  fickle  moon  which 
lovers  worship,  quicker  than  the  winds  which  are 
an  emblem  of  human  wishes  and  passions.  If  I 
dream  one  way  and  you  dream  another,  which  of 
them  is  a  third  party  to  follow?  Some  are  inclined 
to  believe  their  own  dreams,  but  few  are  disposed 
to  believe  the  dreams  of  their  neighbors.  And  so, 
in  the  end,  every  one  will  be  found  to  take  the  way 
which  his  impulse  or  his  fancy  or  his  self-interest 
may  lead  him. 

And,  as  the  result  of  the  whole,  the  party  is,  at 
present,  in  a  state  of  unrest,  discontented  with  their 
position,  and  quarrelling  with  one  another.  An  age 
ago  the  old  rationalistic  party  were  very  self-suffi- 
cient, feeling  that  if  they  had  not  the  Bible,  they 
had  natural  religion  to  fall  back  upon.  Now  they 
are  made  to  realize  that  they  cannot  be  so  sure  of 
their  foundation.  Men  of  a  devout  spirit  in  the 
party  of  progress,  corresponding  to  the  ardifsg  ae^iofA^poi 
mentioned  so  often  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  are  becom- 
ing alarmed.  The  piety  which  Theodore  Parker 
did  not  find  in  the  old  Unitarian  body  has  not 
appeared  in  the  new  body.  There  are  fathers  shud- 
dering at  the  thought  of  bringing  up  their  sons  to 
such  a  creed,  or,  rather,  negation  of  creed  :  they 
have  fears  that  its  gossamer  threads  will  not  restrain 
the  youth   when   flesh   and   blood    are    strong    and 


164  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

temptations  are  in  the  way.  Mothers  are  not  sure 
that  the  faith  expounded  will  stay  and  support  their 
daughters,  and  keep  them  from  rushing  into  and 
running  round  the  giddy  whirls  of  pleasure,  in  which 
they  are  certain  to  become  dizzy  and  fall.  For  many 
such  I  have  strong  hopes  that  they  will  be  prepared 
to  move  back  to  the  old  foundations.  And  whether 
they  come  up  to  the  full  faith  which  I  cherish  or  no, 
my  whole  soul  will  be  with  them  in  their  struggle, 
and  my  prayer  is  that  they  may  gain  the  victory. 

But  meanwhile  the  party  of  Free  Thought  is 
moving  on.  They  are  sliding  down  a  steep  slope, 
catching  at  times  at  lumps  of  yielding  earth  or  brittle 
branches,  only  to  find,  as  they  give  way,  that  their 
fall  is  hastened.  It  writes  beautiful  papers  with 
noble  thoughts  and  elevated  sentiments,  which  I 
much  admire,  in  the  pages  of  some  of  our  maga- 
zines, but  with  no  settled  doctrine  or  logical  consist- 
ency. It  has  a  literature,  and  it  has  lectures,  and 
men  go  to  hear  them  who  have  no  faith,  and  who 
do  not  wish  to  have  any,  and  who  would  relieve  the 
dulness  of  a  Sabbath  in  a  city  in  which  Puritanism 
has  still  its  influence  by  listening  to  fine  sentiment 
and  ingenious  speculation,  which  are  more  pleasing 
to  them  than  preaching  about  these  weary  subjects, 
sin  and  salvation.  But  with  all  its  literary  abilit}', 
it  has  not  been  able  to  secure  a  church  organization 
or  church  fellowship  :  it  has  not  even  a  rope  of 
sand  ;  it  has  only  a  ribbon  of  cloud  to  bind  its  mem- 
bers. It  has  discourses,  but  no  united  prayers.  It 
has  certainly  no  God  who  can  or  will  hear  prayer. 


PRESENT  FEELING    OF   THE  PARTY.       165 

I  am  speaking  what  I  know  ;  for  there   are  men 
and  women,  young  men  and  maidens,  who  have  so 
far  opened  their  hearts  to  me.     And  God  forbid  that 
I   should   look   on   them  with   a   sulky  enmity  or  a 
supercilious  pride,  as  if  I  had  a  tide  to  say  to  them, 
"Stand  by,  for  I   am  hoher  than  thou."     Some  of 
them   are  feeling  as  if  the  foundadons  are  giving 
way  ;  they  are  too  proud  to  go  back,  too  timid  to  go 
forward,  and  yet  are  conscious  that  they  have   no 
ground  to  stand  on.     Most  of  them  know  not  what 
to  give  up  and  what  to  hold,  or  what  they  have  left. 
To  my  knowledge,  there  are  young  hearts  wrung 
with  anguish,  till  feelings,  more  bitter  than  tears, 
have  been  pressed  from  them  without  bringing  any 
relief.     With  some  their  voice  is  a  cry  like  that  of 
the  child  coming  into  the  world  ;  like  that  of  Goethe, 
when  he  left  the  world,  demanding  "  more   light." 
With  some  it  is  a  wail  of  disappointment,  like  that 
which  came  from  the   Hebrews  when  they  looked 
into  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant  and  saw  it  empty,  the 
tables  of  the  law,  the  pot  of  manna,  and  the  bud- 
ding rod   all   gone.     With   some   it  is  a  bitterness 
against  what  has  deceived  the  world  and  deceived 
themselves;   and  it  would  vent  itself  in  a  curse,  if 
they  knew  of  a  God  or  a  devil,  against  whom  to 
direct  it.     With  some  it  is  a  feeling  of  wanton  levity, 
as  if  they  rejoiced  at  being  delivered  from  all  their 
fears,  and  were  able  to  say,  "  I  have  got  rid  of  thee, 
O  mine  enemy  !  " 

Fortunately  or  unfortunately,  it  is  the  last  of  its 
race  ;  and,  like  certain  doomed  Indian  tribes,  it  feels 


1 66  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

itself  to  be  so.  It  is  "the  last  rose  of  summer  left 
blooming  alone  ; "  but  it  must  go,  for  the  winter  is 
coming.  Its  doom  is  to  be  eaten  up  by  a  spectral 
figure  which  you  may  see  approaching  wdth  th-m 
and  steady  step,  but  with  lean  and  haggard  form, 
spreading  like  death  a  shivering  feeling  wherever 
it  goes.  I  am  sorr}'  to  be  obliged  to  show^  to  these 
fair  forms  which  move  so  gaily  what  is  the  doom 
awaiting  after  they  have  danced  a  little  time  longer. 

An  immense  solitary  spectre  waits  : 
It  has  no  shape,  it  has  no  sound  ;  it  has 
No  place,  it  has  no  time;  it  is,  and  was, 
And  will  be;   it  is  never  more  nor  less. 
Nor  glad  nor  sad.     Its  name  is  Nothingness. 
Power  walketh  high ;  and  misery  doth  crawl ; 
And  the  clepsydron  drips ;  and  the  sands  fall 
Down  in  the  hour-glass;  and  the  shadows  sweep 
Around  the  dial;   and  men  wake  and  sleep. 
Live,  strive,  regret,  forget,  and  love,  and  hate. 
And  know  it.     This  spectre  saith,  I  wait, 
And  at  the  last  it  beckons  and  they  pass ; 
And  still  the  red  sands  fall  within  the  glass. 
And  still  the  shades  around  the  dial  sweep; 
And  still  the  water-clock  doth  drip  and  weep. 
And  this  is  all. 

This  is  Positivism.  I  suppose  Diodorus,  sur- 
named  Chronos,  the  Slow,  must  have  written  about 
it  in  ancient  times ;  for  it  is  recorded  of  him  that  he 
wrote  a  treatise  on  the  Awful  Nothing  and  died  in 
despair.  As  his  work  has  not  come  dow^n  to  us, 
I  will  be  obliged  to  describe  it,  even  though  I 
should  expose  myself  to  the  sarcasm  of  the  Scythian 
traveller,  Vae  ^lanUuii  Nihili. 


PRESENT  ERROR.  167 


POSITIVISM. 

I  take  as  representatives  of  it,  M.  Comte,  Mr. 
Mill,  and  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer.  They  have  auxil- 
iaries in  Mr.  Grote,  Mr.  Lewes,  Mr.  Buckle,  Pro- 
fessor Bain,  Professor  Huxley,  and  others  powerful 
in  particular  departments ;  but  these  three  may  be 
held  as  the  ablest  defenders  of  their  peculiar  prin- 
ciples. All  agree  in  this,  that  man  can  know  noth- 
ing of  the  nature  of  things ;  that  he  can  know 
merely  phenomena,  or  relations  of  things  unknown  ; 
and  that  all  he  can  do  with  these  is  to  generalize 
them  into  laws.  All  agree  farther,  that  it  is  impos- 
sible for  us  to  rise  to  the  knowledge  of  first  or  final 
causes,  and  they  exert  their  whole  energy  in  de- 
nouncing the  attempt  to  find  what  they  call  occult 
causes.  So  far  they  agree.  On  other  and  not 
unimportant  points  they  differ.  Comte  sa3^s  that  all 
our  knowledge  comes  through  the  senses,  and  that 
the  study  of  the  mind  must  be  a  study  of  the  brain. 
Mill  says  we  have  other  ideas,  or  rather  he  would 
call  them  feelings,  besides  those  got  through  the 
senses ;  and  both  he  and  Herbert  Spencer  argue 
that  we  can  study  the  mind  through  self-conscious- 
ness. Mill  generates  all  our  ideas  from  sensation, 
and  feelings  springing  up  in  an  unknown  way  by< 
means  of  association  of  ideas,  which  is  capable  of 
turning  them  into  the  varied  shapes  which  they 
take.  Spencer  gets  them  by  development  through 
long  ages,  first  in  the  brutes  and  then  in  the  human 


1 68  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

races.  Comte,  who  was  largely  an  impetuous  intel- 
lectual steam-engine,  —  he  would  have  said  brain- 
engine, —  takes  little  or  no  notice  of  our  ideas  of 
beauty  and  morality.  Mill  derives  them  from  asso- 
ciation, giving  to  association  an  indefinitely  large 
power.  Spencer  ascribes  them  to  development,  but 
not  unfolding  what  are  the  powers  involved  in  the 
development.  Comte  is  an  open  and  rabid  atheist. 
Mr.  Mill  evidently  feels  that  he  has  no  argument 
left,  on  his  system,  to  prove  the  existence  of  God, 
utters  no  profession  of  his  faith,  and  believes  that 
an  atheist  may  be  a  man  of  high  piety.  Herbert 
Spencer  argues  that  beyond  known  phenomena 
there  is,  and  must  be,  a  great  unknown  ;  and  he 
allots  this  region  to  religion,  where  there  may,  or 
there  may  not  be,  an  unknown  God.  Comte  is  the 
most  original  thinker;  but  is,  throughout,  narrow, 
one-sided,  dogmatic,  moving  on  in  one  line  like  the 
blindered  horse,  or  the  steam  locomotive,  seeing 
nothing  on  either  side  of  him.  Mill  has  the  widest 
sympathies,  and  is  the  most  appreciative  of  the 
views  of  others,  though  often  he  is  narrow  and  ex- 
clusive, and  is  not  able  to  follow  out  his  views 
consistently.  Spencer  is  the  most  vigorous  specu- 
lator of  them  all ;  and,  like  the  giants  of  old,  he 
would  heap  Pelion  and  Pindus,  and  presumptuously 
reach  the  greatest  heights  without  passing  through 
the  intermediate  steps. 

M.  Comte  provided  a  religion  and  a  worship 
for  his  followers.  He  had  no  God,  but  he  had  a 
"Grand  Etre,"  in  Collective  Humanity,  or  "the  con- 


COMTKS   SYSTEM  OF  RELIGION.  169 

tinuous  resultant  of  all  the  forces  capable  of  volim- 
tarily  concurring  in  the  universal  perfectioning  of 
the  world,"  being  in  fact  a  deification  of  his  sys- 
tem of  science  and  sociology.  In  the  worship  he 
enjoined,  he  has  nine  sacraments,  and  a  priest- 
hood, and  public  honors  to  be  paid  to  the  Collective 
Humanity ;  with  no  public  liberty  of  conscience  or 
of  education  in  sacred,  or,  indeed,  in  any  subjects. 
The  religious  observances  were  to  occupy  two  hours 
every  day.  Mr.  Mill  tells  us,  "Private  adoration  is 
to  be  addressed  to  Collective  Humanity  in  the  per- 
sons of  worthy  individual  representatives,  who  may 
be  either  living  or  dead,  but  must  in  all  cases  be 
women;  for  women,  being  the  sexe  aimant,  rep- 
resent the  best  attribute  of  humanity,  that  which 
ought  to  regulate  all  human  life,  nor  can  humanity 
possibly  be  symbolized  in  any  form  but  that  of  a 
woman.  The  objects  of  private  adoration  are  the 
mother,  the  wife,  and  the  daughter,  representing 
severally  the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future,  and 
calling  into  active  exercise  the  three  social  senti- 
ments,—  veneration,  attachment,  and  kindness.  We 
are  to  regard  them,  whether  dead  or  alive,  as  our 
guardian  angels,  « les  vrais  anges  gardiens.'  If 
the  last  two  have  never  existed  ;  or  if,  in  the  particu- 
lar case,  any  of  the  three  types  is  too  faulty  for  the 
office  assigned  it,  — their  place  may  be  supplied  by 
some  other  type  of  womanly  excellence,  even  by 
one  -merely  historical."  *  The  Christian  religion 
surely  does  not  sufter  by  being  placed  alongside  of 

*  Comte  and  Positivism,  p.  150. 
S 


170  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

this  system,  which  is  one  of  the  two  new  rehgions 
which  this  century  has  produced,  the  other  being 
Mormonism.  The  author  clung  more  and  more 
fondly  to  this  faith  and  ceremonial  as  he  advanced  in 
years.  His  English  followers  are  ashamed  of  it,  and 
ascribe  it  to  his  lunacy  ;  as  if  he  had  not  been  tinged 
with  madness  (as  his  poor  wife  knew)  all  his  life, 
and  as  if  his  whole  system  were  not  the  product  of  a 
powerful,  but  of  a  constitutionally  diseased,  intellect. 
He  denounces  his  English  followers  because  they 
did  not  adopt  his  moral  and  social  system  ;  he  char- 
acterizes the  conversion  of  those  who  have  adopted 
his  positivity  and  rejected  his  religion  as  an  abor- 
tion ;  and  declares  that  it  must  proceed  from  impo- 
tence of  intellect,  or  insufficiency  of  heart,  commonly 
from  both  !  *  There  is  a  basis  of  wisdom  in  this 
complaint.  All  history  shows  that  man  is  a  relig- 
ious, quite  as  certainly  as  he  is  a  feeling  and  a 
rational,  being.  But  what  has  the  British  school 
provided  to  meet  man's  religious  wants  ?  As  yet 
they  have  furnished  nothing.  But  Mr.  Mill,  who 
always  weighs  his  words,  and  who  is  too  skilful  a 
dialectician  to  say  more  than  he  means,  evidently 
points  to  something  which  is  being  hatched,  and 
may  some  day  burst  forth.  While  he  has  the  strong- 
est objection  to  the  system  of  politics  and  morals  set 
forth  in  the  "Politique  Positive,"  he  thinks  "it  has 
superabundantly  shown  the  possibility  of  giving  to 
the  service  of  humanity,  even  without  the  belief  in 
a  Providence,  both  the  psychological  power  and  the 

*  Politique  Positive,  Tome  I.  Pref.  p.  xv.,  III.  p.  34. 


HINTS    OF  MR.   MILL. 


171 


social  efficacy  of  a  religion ;  making  it  take  hold 
of  human  life,  and  color  all  thought,  feeling,  and 
action  in  a  manner  of  which  the  greatest  ascendancy 
ever  exercised  by  any  religion  may  be  but  a  type 
and  foretaste."*  More  specifically  in  a  late  work 
Mr.  Mill  says,  that  "though  conscious  of  being  an 
extremely  small  minority,"  —  a  circumstance  which 
is  sure  to  catch  those  "  individualists  "  who  are  bent 
on  appearing  original,  —  "  we  venture  to  think  that  a 
religion  may  exist  without  belief  in  a  God,  and  that 
a  religion  without  a  God  may  be,  even  to  Christians, 
an  instructive  and  profitable  object  of  contempla- 
tion." f  He  tells  us  that,  in  order  to  constitute  a 
religion,  there  must  be  "a  creed  or  conviction,"  "a 
belief  or  set  of  beliefs,"  "a  sentiment  connected 
with  this  creed,"  and  a  ''ailtits:'  I  confess  I  should 
like  excessively  to  see  this  new  religion  with  its 
creed  and  its  cultus  fully  developed.  It  would  match 
the  theologies,  with  their  ceremonial  observances, 
projected  by  doctrinaires  in  the  heat  of  the  first 
French  Revolution.  There  is  no  risk  of  the  Brit- 
ish school  setting  up  a  religion  and  a  worship  so 
superbly  ridiculous  as  that  of  M.  Comte ;  but  I 
venture  to  predict  that  when  it  comes,  it  will  be  so 
scientifically  cold,  and  so  emotionally  blank,  as  to 
be  incapable  of  gathering  any  interest  around  it,  of 
accomplishing  any  good,  or,  I  may  add,  inflicting 
any  evil. 

The  world  will   soon   be   in   a   position  fairly  to 
estimate  M.    Comte,   who   has   often   been   under- 

*  Utilitarianism,  p.  48.  f  Comte  and  Positivism,  p.  133. 


172  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

estimated,  and  as  often  over-estimated.  At  first  lit- 
tle appreciated  by  the  mass,  even  of  thinkers,  he 
secured  at  an  early  stage  the  admiration  of  a  select 
few,  who  discerned  the  vigor  of  his  intellect  and 
saw  the  partial  truth  which  his  system  contained, 
or  who  were  subdued  by  his  dogmatic  spirit  and 
power  of  assertion :  these  men  spoke  of  him  in 
exaggerated  terms,  and  compared  him  to  Bacon 
and  to  Leibnitz.  His  direct  influence  has  all  along 
been  very  small,  being  confined  to  those  who  had 
the  courage  to  read  through  his  ponderous  volumes, 
in  which  most  had  to  confess  with  Mr.  Huxley  :  "  I 
found  the  veins  of  ore  few  and  far  between,  and  the 
rock  so  apt  to  run  to  mud,  that  one  incurred  the 
risk  of  being  intellectually  smothered  in  the  work- 
ing." But  his  indirect  influence,  through  eminent 
men  who  followed  his  method  and  caught  his  spirit, 
has  been  very  great.  However,  the  time  of  reac- 
tion against  him  and  his  exclusive  pretensions  seems 
to  have  come.  Sir  John  Herschel  showed,  twenty 
years  ago,  that  he  was  guilty  of  mathematical  blun- 
ders which  would  have  disgraced  any  student  seek- 
ing for  honors  in  Cambridge.  And  now  his  friends 
are  turning  out  to  be  his  bitterest  foes.  Mr.  Mill 
cannot  express  in  too  strong  language  his  abhor- 
rence of  his  system  of  social  organization,  which 
admits  of  no  liberty  of  action,  or  even  of  thought  and 
conscience.  Mr.  Spencer  has  criticised  severely 
his  much  lauded  generalization  of  the  progress  of 
knowledge,  which  is  said  to  be  first  theological,  then 
metaphysical,  then  positive,  showing  that  it  is   full 


ESTIMATE    OF   COMTE.  173 

of  error  and  confusion.  And  now  Professor  Huxley 
tells  us  :  ''  That  part  of  M.  Comte's  writings  which 
deals  with  the  philosophy  of  physical  science  ap- 
peared to  me  to  possess  singularly  little  value,  and 
to  show  that  he  had  but  the  most  superficial,  and 
merely  second-hand,  knowledge  of  most  branches 
of  what  is  usually  understood  by  science.  I  do  not 
mean  by  this  merely  that  Comte  was  behind  our 
present  knowledge,  or  that  he  was  unacquainted 
with  the  details  of  the  science  of  his  own  day.  No 
one  could  justly  make  such  defects  cause  of  com- 
plaint in  a  philosophical  writer  of  the  past  genera- 
tion. What  struck  me  was  his  want  of  apprehension 
of  the  great  features  of  science,  his  strange  mistakes 
as  to  the  merits  of  his  scientific  contemporaries,  and 
his  ludicrously  erroneous  notions  about  the  part 
which  some  of  the  scientific  doctrines,  current  in  his 
time,  were  destined  to  play  in  the  future."*  Every 
man,  after  being  buffeted  about  —  it  may  be  —  in 
this  world,  will  at  last  find  his  level.  These  men  are 
placing  M.  Comte  somewhat  lower  than  I  do.  But 
it  is  a  question  for  them  to  settle.  These  criticisms 
show  that  the  day  of  M.  Comte  is  fast  declining. 

*  "Lay  Sermons,"  p.  164.  Mr.  Huxley  thinks  that  there  is 
some  value  in  "the  chapters  on  speculative  and  practical  sociol- 
ogy." But  this  is  not  just  the  department  in  which  Mr.  Huxley 
is  an  authority.  I  am  reminded  of  a  story  told  by  Hugh  Miller 
of  a  company  of  savans  who  were  discussing  the  merits  of  the 
"  Vestiges  of  Creation,"  then  newly  published.  The  naturalist 
was  sure  that  it  was  full  of  bad  natural  history,  but  believed 
that  the  astronomy  was  good;  while  the  natural  philosopher 
had  heard  that  the  geology  was  good,  but  knew  that  the  astron- 
omy was  incorrect,  &c. 


174  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

But  will  the  other  members  of  the  school  have  a 
longer  day,  or  even  so  long?  So  far  as  they  have 
advanced  any  branch  of  natural  science,  of  history, 
or  of  political  economy,  their  nam.es  will  live,  and 
go  down  with  their  discoveries  to  future  generations. 
But  it  is  the  mistake  of  these  men,  that  because  they 
are  eminent  in  some  one  or  two  branches  of  science, 
say  natural  history  or  geology,  they  are  therefore 
fitted  to  speculate  on  all  the  sciences,  on  the  w'hole 
history  and  destiny  of  mankind,  and  to  settle  or  un- 
settle for  ever  all  the  questions  bearing  on  the  rela- 
tions of  the  universe  to  its  Maker.  For  this  work, 
some  of  them  seem  to  me  to  hav^e  no  aptitude  and  no 
calling.  I  am  sure  that,  in  the  wide  fields  of  theol- 
ogy and  philosophy,  they  are  as  ignorant  as  Comte 
w^as  in  the  domains  of  mathematics  and  experimental 
science.  Their  generalizations  here  have  a  rash- 
ness which  w^ould  not  be  tolerated  for  one  instant  in 
the  special  fields  of  science  in  which  they  have 
made  discoveries.  The  time  is  not  far  oft'  when 
they,  too,  will  come  to  their  level,  which  wdll  be  con- 
siderably lower  than  their  present  eminence. 

In  m\'  early  Lectures  in  this  series,  I  met  their 
fundamental  principles.  It  is  possible  that  some 
have  felt  that  in  these  I  dwelt  too  much  on  certain 
abstract  points  about  knowledge  and  existence. 
But  I  did  it  of  design  =  I  had  powerful  antagonists 
to  meet,  and  I  had  to  prepare  my  weapons  with 
care.  I  labored  to  show  that  the  mind  begins  its 
intelligent  acts  with  knowledge,  a  knowledge  of 
things.     I  have  no  objection  to  call  it  a  knowledge 


WAT  TO  MEET  POSITIVISM.  175 

of  phenomena;  but,  by  phenomena  in  that  case,  I 
mean  not  phenomena  apart  from  things,  which  is  a 
mere  abstraction,  but  things  as  appearing.  The 
mind  knows  relations,  but  not  relations  between 
things  unknown,  which  is  impossible,  but  relations 
between  things  known  so  far  known.  Beginning 
with  knowledge,  what  it  reaches  by  generalization 
is  also  knowledge,  and  a  knowledge  of  realities. 
Beginning  with  intuitive  knowledge,  it  adds  to  it  by 
logical  processes ;  and  what  it  gains  is  also  knowl- 
edge. Its  intuitive  power  is  confined  within  very 
stringent  limits.  In  particular,  it  has  no  a  -priori 
forms  to  impose  on  things.  It  does  not  override 
experience.  It  simply  gives  us  a  certain  knowledge 
of  things.  Its  main  office  is  to  enable  us  to  gain 
experience,  and  to  assure  us  that  the  knowledge  we 
thus  gain  is  of  real  things.  Mr.  Mill,  proceeding 
on  a  different  theory,  declares  —  and  his  theory 
requires  him  to  do  so  —  that  there  may  be  worlds 
in  which  two  and  two  make  five,  in  which  parallel 
lines  meet,  in  which  a  straight  line  may  return  upon 
itself  and  enclose  a  space,  and  in  which  there  may  be 
effects  without  a  cause.  In  all  this  he  is  consistent : 
it  is  the  logical  consequence  of  his  theory.  And 
you  can  meet  him  only  by  undermining  his  theory. 
This  is  what  I  endeavored  to  do  in  previous  Lect- 
ures. On  his  principles,  you  cannot  prove  the 
existence  of  God,  just  as  you  cannot  prove  that  two 
and  tv^^o  make  four  in  the  planet  Jupiter,  or  that  a 
straight  line  may  not  enclose  a  space  in  the  constel- 
lation Orion.     For  aught  that  this  theory  can  say  to 


176  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

the  contrary,  it  may  be  an  accepted  axiom  in  the 
universities  of  the  Dog  Star  that  parallel  lines  may 
and  must  meet  if  prolonged  sufficiently  far,  and  not 
coming  in  the  way  of  a  little  planet  called  Earth  — 
seen  by  a  telescope  of  monster  power  —  where  a 
small  mortal  called  man  says,  in  his  ignorance,  that 
parallel  lines  cannot  meet.  I  admit  that  if  we  cannot 
prove  that  two  and  two  make  four  everj^where,  we 
may  also  be  unable  to  prove  that  every  effect  has  a 
cause,  or  that  this  world  has  had  a  cause.  But  if, 
as  Aristotle  says,  a  man's  mind  is  organized  to  dis- 
cover truth,  and  truth  be  not  beyond  his  reach,  then 
I  hold  that  we  are  entitled  to  say  that  in  all  times 
and  in  every  place  two  and  two  make  four,  and  a 
thing  effected  implies  a  power  effecting  it,  and  that 
the  existence  of  benevolent  affections  in  man  implies 
benevolence  in  Him  who  planted  them  there,  and 
that  the  Moral  Law  in  the  heart  implies  a  Moral 
Governor.  The  spectroscope  directed  to  that  star, 
which  takes  a  hundred  thousand  years  to  send  its 
light  to  the  earth,  tells  us  that  these  effects  could 
not  be  produced  on  the  instrument,  unless  there 
were  hydrogen  and  sodium  in  that  star ;  and  I  am 
constrained  to  believe,  on  the  principle  of  cause  and 
effect,  that  it  speaks  the  truth.  And  when  I  discover 
that  beautiful  adjustment  in  the  eye  which  enables 
it  to  receive  light  from  that  distant  star,  I  am  as 
sure  that  there  has  been  a  designing  mind  construct- 
ing it,  as  I  am  that  there  has  been  an  intelligence 
planning  and  making  that  spectroscope.  These 
same  principles  that  entitle  us  to  argue  that  there 


CONSEQUENCES    OF  POSITIVISM.  177 

is  a  God  authorize  us  to  say  that  we  so  far  know  that 
God, — the  adequate  cause  of  the  effects  we  per- 
ceive, the  source  of  that  power  we  feel  in  ourselves 
and  see  exhibited  on  the  earth,  the  fountain  of  that 
benevolence  from  which  our  affections  flow  as  petty 
rills,  the  authority  from  which  the  moral  power  in 
us  derives  its  authority. 

Having  examined  the  theory,  I  believe  fairly  and 
logically,  we  may  now  look  for  a  moment  at  its  con- 
sequences, speculative,  moral,  and  practical.  What 
have  we  left  according  to  this  new  philosophy? 
We  have  a  series  of  feelings  aware  of  itself  and 
permanent,  or  rather  prolonged  ;  and  we  have  an 
association  of  sensations,  and  perceived  resem- 
blances and  possibilities  of  sensations.  Truth  can  be 
nothing  more  than  an  accordance  of  our  ideas  with 
sensations  and  laws  of  the  association  of  sensations  ; 
which  sensations  come  we  know  not  whence,  and 
are  associated  by  resemblances  existing  we  know 
not  how ;  or  more  frequently  by  contiguity,  with  no 
relation  of  reason,  with  no  connection  in  the  nature 
of  things,  and  being  very  possibly  altogether  fortui- 
tous or  absolutely  fatalistic.  The  sensations  and 
associations  of  sensation  generate  ideas  and  behefs 
which  do  not,  however,  either  in  themselves  or  their 
mode  of  formation,  generate  any  reality.  This  is 
the  consequence  on  Mr.  Mill's  theory ;  and  on  Mr. 
Spencer's  it  is  development  out  of  a  thing  unknown, 
according-  to  an  absolute  fatalism.  And  is  this  the 
sum  of  what  has  been  gained  by  the  highest  science 
of   the    nineteenth    century?     Can   this   satisfy  the 

8* 


178  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

wants  of  the  soul  seeking  truth,  yearning  for  reality, 
seeking  for  light  as  plants  do  in  the  dark  cellar,  and 
striving  towards  it,  being  sure  that  it  exists  and  is 
to  be  found?  Does  it  not  undermine  every  belief 
in  goodness,  in  affection,  in  beauty,  and  in  truth,  to 
which  men  have  ever  clung?  Does  it  not  leave  the 
soul  as  the  moon  is  supposed  to  be  left,  and  as 
some  think  the  earth  will  be  ultimately  left,  with 
its  rocks,  its  extinct  volcanoes,  but  without  atmos- 
phere, without  water,  without  life?  Diodorus  the 
Slow,  after  writing  his  profound  treatise  on  the 
Awful  Nothing,  died  in  despair ;  and,  deprived  of 
all  their  deepest  instincts  and  highest  hopes,  I  feel 
as  if  there  was  nothing  left  for  those  who  accept 
this  theory  of  nescience  but  to  do  the  same. 

This,  then,  is  the  gulf  to  which  we  have  come. 
It  is  as  well  that  young  men  entering  on  the  path 
should  know  wdiat  is  the  swamp  in  which  it  termi- 
nates. Some  who  have  gone  so  far  will  draw  back. 
But  they  will  not  fall  back  upon  the  icy  crystals 
constructed  by  Channing,  or  the  melted  snow  of 
Parker  and  Emerson.  Yet  they  cannot  stand  where 
they  now  do.  If  they  do  not  draw  back,  they  must 
go  forward ;  and  they  wall  find  that,  beneath  this 
deep,  there  is  a  lower  deep  still.  This  deep  is 
MateriaHsm,  which  I  mean  to  examine  in  my  next 
Lecture. 


VII. 

Materialism.  —  Circumstances  favoring  it.  —  Parts  of 
THE  Body  most  intimately  connected  with  Mental 
Action.  —  Grosser  and  more  Refined  Forms  of  Ma- 
terialism. —  BUCHNER,  Maudesley,  Bain,  Huxley, 
Tyndall,  Spencer.  —  Objections  to  Materialism.  — 
Mind  not  one  of  the  Correlated  Physical  Forces. 

TN  my  last  Lecture  I  gave  a  sketch  of  the  progress 
-^  of  Free  Thought  in  this  country,  and  showed 
that  it  is  tending  to  sink  towards  Positivism.  But 
this  negative  philosophy  cannot  last  any  great  length 
of  time.  Persons  cannot  live  long,  for  they  cannot 
breathe,  in  a  vacuum.  A  terrible  wind  will  rush  in 
to  fill  up  the  void  when  it  begins  to  be  felt.  If  men's 
heads  do  not  discover  the  fallacy,  their  hearts  will 
turn  away  from  the  emptiness.  But,  meanwhile, 
the  movement  has  its  course  to  run ;  and,  as  it  does 
so,  it  will  freeze,  by  its  coldness,  much  blood  at  the 
heart,  which  would  otherwise  be  felt  vitally  in  every 
member  of  the  frame  and  go  forth  in  practical 
activity;  nay,  as  it  is  dragged  along,  it  may  crush 
much  life  under  its  Juggernaut  wheels.  Before  it 
closes  its  course  it  must  assume  another  form  :  it 
will  become  a  prevailing  Materialism. 

A  number  of  concurring  circumstances  favor  this 
tendency.       Thus  our  young  thinkers  have  come 


l8o  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

to  see  the  utter  futility  of  the  whole  a  -priori  philos- 
ophy of  the  age  now  passing  away,  and  are  pre- 
pared for  a  reaction,  in  which  the  ebb  will  be  as 
strong  as  the  previous  tide.  It  has  ever  been  the 
great  error  and  sin  of  the  speculative  rational  phi- 
losophy that  it  has  been  expending  its  strength  in 
building  up  in  one  age  ingenious  theories  which 
the  next  age  proceeds  to  take  down.  This  has 
produced  the  sentiment  first  expressed  by  Less- 
ing,  and  so  extensively  adopted  in  the  present  day  : 
"  It  is  not  truth  which  makes  man  worthy,  but  the 
striving  after  truth.  If  God  in  his  right  hand  held 
every  truth,  and  in  his  left  hand  the  one  inward 
impulse  after  truth,  although  with  the  condition  that 
I  should  err  for  ever,  and  bade  me  choose,  I  would 
humbly  incline  to  his  left,  saying,  O  Father,  give 
me  that :  pure  Faith  is  for  thee  alone."  There  is 
a  wide-spread  idea,  favored  very  much  by  the  way 
in  which  the  department  has  been  taught,  that  phi- 
losophy is  at  best  a  mere  gymnastic,  exercising  the 
faculties,  but  not  capable  of  revealing  truth  ;  and 
people  say  that  whatever  may  have  been  the  need 
and  the  use  of  such  Indian  clubs  and  parallel  bars 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  we  do  not  require  them  now, 
when  we  have  such  pleasant  open-air  exercise  in 
the  natural  sciences,  w^iich  do  reveal  truth.  Will 
men  continue  to  search  after  truth  when  it  has  been 
discovered,  and  is  allowed,  that  truth  cannot  be 
found?  The  father,  in  the  fable,  got  his  sons  to  dig 
in  the  field  in  the  hope  of  finding  a  treasure  :  but 
they  would  not  have  done  this,  had  they  thought 


EXCLUSIVE   STUDY  OF  PHYSICS.  i8l 

there  was  no  treasure  ;  and  I  am  sure  they  would  not 
have  been  led  by  like  motives  to  dig  a  second  field. 
Such  dialectic  activity  wastes  the  energy,  without  in- 
creasing the  strength.  He  who  thus  fights  is  like  one 
beating  the  air  ;  and  his  exertion  ends  not  in  bracing 
and  exhilaration,  but  in  weariness  and  restlessness. 
The  bird  which  has  been  buffeting  the  wind  on  the 
wild  waste  of  the  ocean  will  alight  on  the  first  bare 
rock  or  mast-top  it  falls  in  with.  Persons  who  have 
been  cheated  by  those  who  promised  to  give  them 
every  thing,  but  really  gave  them  nothing,  will  be 
ready  to  trust  the  first  man  who  bestows  on  them 
ever  so  small  a  boon.  So  there  are  youths  in  our 
day,  who,  feeling  as  if  metaph3^sics  could  give  them 
nothing,  are  occupying  themselves  exclusively  with 
the  baldest  physics. 

Then,  there  is  the  exclusive  study  of  the  material 
sciences  in  so  many  of  our  educational  institutions. 
I  say  exclusive^  not  extensive  ;  for  I  rejoice  in  the 
extensive  study  of  natural  science,  and  believe  that 
every  settled  branch  of  knowledge  should  have  a 
place  in  every  academic  institution.  But  if  we  would 
not  produce  a  one-sided  —  that  is,  a  malformed  —  set 
of  minds,  we  must  have  other  studies  mingled  with 
them.  In  this  country,  a  Bachelor's  Degree,  which 
used  to  mean  that  the  youth  was  a  scholar  with 
varied  accomplishments  in  literature,  and  in  mental 
as  well  as  natural  science,  can  now  be  had  with 
little  or  no  knowledge  of  mind  or  its  laws.  I  rejoice 
in  the  establishment  of  medical  schools,  and  the 
multiplication  of  scientific  schools  ;  but  steps  should 


l82  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

be  taken  to  secure  that  in  these  there  also  be 
instruction  in  branches  fitted  to  cultivate  and  refine 
the  taste,  and  that  our  young  men  be  reminded 
that  they  have  souls,  which  they  are  very  apt  to 
forget  when  their  attention  is  engrossed  with  the 
motions  of  stars  or  the  motions  of  molecules,  with 
the  flesh,  the  bones,  the  brain.  The  cry  of  the 
times  is  for  what  they  call  -practical  studies  to  pre- 
pare young  men  for  life ;  but  fathers  may  find  that 
their  sons,  after  all,  are  not  just  prepared  for  life 
with  its  temptations,  when  they  have  no  instruction  in 
the  duties  they  owe  to  their  own  souls  and  to  God. 

The  result  of  all  this  is  the  creation  of  a  certain 
spirit.  For  there  is  such  a  thing  as  the  spirit  of  the 
age,  —  such  a  thing  as  the  spirit  of  a  college,  more 
powerful  than  the  influence  of  all  teachers.  There 
are  susceptible  youths  who  catch  the  spirit  of  the 
times,  as  lake  waters  take  the  hue  of  the  sky  above, 
or  as  worms  take  the  dye  of  the  herbage  they  feed 
on.  Just  as  there  was  a  great  run  two  ages  ago 
towards  rationalism,  and  an  age  ago  towards  intui- 
tionalism, so  there  is  a  corresponding  set  of  youths 
in  our  day  who  will  become  Comtists,  or  Millites, 
or  Spencerites,  or  even  Huxleyites :  the  demand 
will  create  the  supply  ;  and  they  will  find  able  men 
to  lead  them  on  over  the  dreary  plain  strewn  with 
the  skeletons  of  those  who  have  there  wandered 
and  perished. 

Any  observant  man  may  see  the  tide  sweeping 
along.  Materialism  was  a  prevailing  creed  in 
France  during  the  whole  period  of  the  repression 


MATERIALISM  IN  EUROPE.  183 

of  thought  under  the  7'egime  of  Louis  Napoleon,  and 
was  very  agreeable  to  the  dcuii-monde  which  ruled 
the  manners  and  morals  of  Paris,  and  prepared  the 
way  for  the  present  humiliation  of  that  country. 
"  Vive  la  Materialisme  "  has  been  shouted  from  a 
number  of  their  schools  of  medicine  at  their  open- 
ings and  public  exhibitions.  In  German}^  theology 
is  becoming  orthodox  in  the  theological  Faculties, 
and  a  high  philosophy  has  still  a  place  in  some  of 
the  universities  ;  but,  for  a  number  of  years,  mate- 
rialism has  had  a  considerable  acceptance  among  a 
set  of  able  physiologists,  among  medical  men  and 
schoolmasters.  In  England,  there  are  a  thousand 
influences  opposing  it  in  the  religion  of  the  country, 
in  the  moral  tone  long  sustained  among  the  people, 
and  become  hereditary :  but  there  is  an  active 
school  of  philosophy  exercising  a  power  over  the 
young  men,  soon  to  become  the  influential  men  of 
the  country ;  and  this  is  strongly  set  in  current 
towards  sensationalism  and  positivism,  which  are 
certain  to  end  in  materialism.  There  are  like 
agencies  resisting  the  entrance  and  the  progress 
of  the  materialistic  school  in  this  countr}^  and  the 
higher  Unitarians  heartily  unite  at  this  point  with 
the  Evangelicals  ;  but  still  there  are  underground 
rumblings,  which  show  that  an  earthquake  is  at 
hand,  in  the  predilections  of  some  of  our  physical 
inquirers  and  medical  schools,  sure  to  be  favored  by 
and  to  find  acceptance  with  the  votaries  of  pleasure, 
increasing  among  us  with  our  wealth,  and  more 
rapidly  than   our  wealth. 


184  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

This  materialism  will  require  to  be  met.  In 
meeting  it,  it  will  be  proper  to  begin  with  admitting 
that  there  is  a  close  and  intimate  connection  in  this 
present  state  of  things  between  mind  and  body. 
This  has  been  all  along  seen  and  allowed  by  the 
most  determined  spiritualists.  Man  does  not  con- 
sist of  mind  alone  :  he  consists  of  soul  and  body. 
This  is  all  that  modern  physiology  has  established, 
throwing  a  little,  and  only  a  little,  light  upon  it ;  no, 
not  on  the  connection  between  soul  and  body,  but 
on  the  bodily  organs  most  intimately  connected 
with  mental  action. 

It  is  shown  that  in  the  animal  body  there  is  an 
Automatic  System,  consisting  of  ganglia  with  re- 
ticulated nerves,  some  fibres  of  which  conduct  tow- 
ards the  centre,  others  outwards  from  the  ganglia  to 
muscles  :  an  impression  made  upon  the  former,  the 
afferent  fibres,  conducted  inward  to  the  centre,  is 
followed  by  an  action  outward  through  afferent 
nerves,  resulting  in  motion.  Thus,  on  pricking  the 
leg  of  a  frog,  there  is  an  action  from  the  periphery 
to  the  centre  of  the  ganglion,  and  again  an  action 
outwards,  and  the  leg  is  drawn  in.  These  ganglia 
serve  most  important  purposes  in  the  lower  animals, 
as  in  bees  and  articulated  animals  generally,  where 
they  carry  on  the  motions  of  the  creature.  But  they 
are  found  also  in  man.  They  run  along  the  spinal 
cord,  and  there  is  no  scientific  proof — though  some 
allege  that  there  is  —  that  their  action  is  accompa- 
nied with  sensation  or  with  will.  It  has  always 
appeared  to  me  that  we  may  justifiably  discover  final 


SENSORI-MOTOR    STSTEM.  1 85 

cause  in  this  complicated  arrangement  for  enabling 
the  lower  creatures,  and  even  human  beings,  to  per- 
form certain  needful  motions,  without  the  effort  and 
the  labor  of  the  reason  and  the  will.  All  this  is 
evidently  a  mere  organic  apparatus,  and  we  do  not 
discover  in  it  any  manifestation  of  mental  action. 

It  is  shown  that  there  is  a  Sensori-Motor  appa- 
ratus. Here  we  have  no  will,  but  we  have  sensation. 
Thus,  in  sneezing  and  coughing,  the  act  is  not  vol- 
untary ;  but  we  feel  it.  We  have  examples  of  the 
same  kind  in  the  quick  withdrawal  of  the  hand 
when  it  is  touched  with  a  hot  iron  ;  in  the  cry  which 
excessive  pain  calls  forth  ;  in  the  distortion  of  tlie 
face  on  account  of  an  offensive  taste  or  smell ;  in 
the  closing  of  the  eyes  when  a  strong  light  falls  on 
them ;  and  in  the  start  produced  by  a  loud  sound. 
Under  the  same  head  may  be  placed  the  marvellous 
adjustment  of  the  human  eye  to  the  distance  of 
objects,  effected  by  a  change  in  the  convexity  of  the 
lens  or  cornea,  together  with  an  alteration  in  the 
direction  of  the  axes  of  the  e3^es.  This,  too,  is  a 
beautiful  provision  for  the  convenience  and  comfort 
of  the  creature,  whereb}^  many  necessary  acts  are 
performed  without  any  labor  of  the  will.  Except 
in  regard  to  the  sensation  felt,  —  in  the  thalami 
oftici^  as  some  think,  —  there  is  no  special  mental 
action  or  affection. 

But  in  the  higher  animals  there  is  a  farther  pro- 
vision. Above  the  automatic  process  in  the  spinal 
cord,  above  the  sensory  centre,  at  the  base  of  the 
brain  are  the  two  Cerebral  Hemispheres.     These 


1 86  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

brain  hemispheres  have  no  sensation  :  they  can  be 
pared  off  without  any  pain  being  felt.  They  can- 
not produce  mation  directly  :  they  can  do  so  only  by 
acting  directly,  or  indirectly,  through  the  motor 
nerves  upon  the  muscular  system.  We  are  now  in 
the  close  proximity  of  proper  mental  action.  We 
have  come  to  the  seat  of  memory,  of  intellect,  and 
of  will.  The  brain  is  composed  of  a  gray  matter 
and  a  white  matter.  Of  these  the  gray  substance 
is  most  intimately  connected  with  mental  action. 
That  gray  matter  may  be  seen  upon  the  surface  of 
the  two  hemispheres  of  the  brain,  and  exists  in  the 
shape  of  minute  cells.  It  may  be  allowed  that 
the  operations  of  the  intellect  are  intimately  con- 
nected with  the  minute  cells  of  the  cortical  layers. 
Without  the  concurrence  of  those  cells,  or  rather 
perhaps  of  the  forces  operating  in  them,  and  which 
they  direct,  there  can  be  no  healthy  intellectual 
action.  They  supply  something  which,  as  a  con- 
cause,  is  necessary  to  mental  action.  When  they 
are  deranged,  the  operations  of  the  mind  are  apt  to 
be  deranged.  It  may  be  farther  allowed  that  there 
is  a  general,  though  by  no  means  an  invariable, 
correspondence  between  the  size  of  the  hemispheres, 
and  still  more  the  convolution  of  the  hemispheres, 
and  the  intellectual  strength.  So  far  physiology 
can  carr}'  us.  This  is  the  form  which  the  old  ex- 
pression of  the  connection  between  mind  and  body 
should  take  in  our  day,  —  a  dependence  of  intellect 
and  will  on  the  cortical  la3'ers  and  contained  cells 
and  forces  of  the  brain  hemispheres.     But  physi- 


CONNECTION   OF  BODY  AND   MIND.        187 

ology  can  go  no  farther.  "  So  exquisitely  delicate, 
however,"  says  Dr.  Maudesle}^  "are  the  organic 
processes  of  mental  development  which  take  place 
in  the  minute  cells  of  the  cortical  layers,  that  they 
are  certainly,  so  far  as  our  present  means  of  inves- 
tigation reach,  quite  impenetrable  to  the  senses : 
the  mysteries  of  their  secret  operations  cannot  be 
unravelled."  * 

So  the  question  remains  where  it  was  before. 
All  this  amounts  to  nothing  more  than  the  old  state- 
ment that  in  the  present  order  of  things  mind  is  so 
far  dependent  on  the  bodily  organism.  Professor 
Tyndall  is  candidly  confessing  the  truth,  when  he 
says,  "The  problem  of  the  connection  of  soul  and 
body  is  as  insoluble  in  its  modern  form  as  it  was  in 
the  pre-scientitic  ages."  It  may  be  maintained,  with 
great  show  of  reason,  that  the  brain-case  is  the 
mere  instrument  of  the  mind  to  enable  it  to  perform 
its  function,  even  as  the  automatic  system  is  an 
apparatus  to  enable  the  animal  to  move,  and  the 
sensori-motor  system  is  a  process  to  warn  it  of 
dangler.  From  all  this  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
cell,  or  cell-power,  constitutes  thought.  It  does  not 
tend  to  show  that  the  physical  power  which  circu- 
lates in  the  cell  becomes  in  the  cell  an  idea,  or. 
recollection,  or  feeling,  or  moral  approbation,  or 
will.  It  may  be,  after  all,  the  mere  organ  by  which 
the  mind  communicates  with  the  body,  and  through 
the  body  with  the  external  world.  No  one  is  enti- 
tled to  say  that  the  brain,  or  the  forces  in  it,  generate 

*  Phjs.  &  Path,  of  Mind,  p.  124. 


l88  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

mind.  It  might  be  nearer  the  truth  to  affirm  that 
mental  action  forms  the  gray  substance,  and  forms 
it  to  suit  its  purposes.  Certain  it  is,  that  intellec- 
tual exercise  enlarges  the  brain  and  makes  it  more 
convoluted,  and  gives  it  greater  capacity  and  apti- 
tude. 

I  must  endeavor  to  furnish  a  sketch  of  the  forms 
which  Materialism  has  assumed  of  late  years.  First, 
I  must  refer  to  its  grosser  shapes.  They  are 
scarcely  worthy  of  being  noticed  before  such  an 
audience  as  this,  for  their  enormous  fallacies  will  at 
once  be  seen.  Still,  it  is  necessary  to  state  them, 
and  so  far  expose  them  ;  for  these  are,  after  all,  the 
forms  in  which  the  doctrine  is  held  by  the  great 
body  of  materialists.  It  is  thus  that  it  is  presented 
to  our  young  men,  to  medical  students,  and  others. 
And  this  is  the  common  sewer  into  which  the  finer 
forms,  which  may  amuse  refined  minds  for  a  time, 
must  ultimately  flow.  They  are  expressed  in  the 
brief  sentence  of  Cabanis,  that  "the  brain  secretes 
thought  as  the  liver  secretes  bile."  Coming  to  our 
day,  we  find  Vogt  adopting  this  statement : 
"Thought  stands  in  the  same  relation  to  the  brain 
as  bile  to  the  liver."  Moleschott  says  that  "  thought 
-is  a  motion  of  matter."  We  may  take,  as  represent- 
ative of  this  school,  Biichner,  whose  work,  "Force 
and  Matter,"  has  been  translated  into  English,  and 
circulated  widely  in  Great  Britain  and  America. 
No  doubt  his  work  is  very  superficial,  but  it  is 
relished  all  the  more  by  multitudes  who  do  not  wish 
to  be  troubled  with  deep  philosophical  discussions. 


BUCHNER.  189 

And  then  he  is  clear  and  outspoken  and  dogmatic, 
uttering  his  dicta  as  if  they  could  not  be  disputed. 
^  The  soul  is  the  product  of  a  peculiar  combination 
of  matter." — "In  the  same  manner  as  the  steam  en- 
gine produces  motion,  so  does  the  organic  compli- 
cation of  force-endowed  materials  produce,  in  the 
animal  body,  a  sum  of  effects  so  interwoven  as  to 
become  a  unit,  and  is  then  by  us  called  spirit." — 
"As  there  is  no  bile  without  liver,  so  there  is  no 
thought  without  brain."  But  he  thinks  that  this 
comparison  gives  a  greater  permanence  to  mind 
than  it  is  entitled  to.  "The  secretion  of  the  liver 
and  kidneys  proceeds  imperceptibly,  and  produces  a 
tangible  substance."  It  is  different  with  thought  as 
the  product  of  the  brain.  "Mental  activity  is  a 
function  of  the  cerebral  substance." — "It  is  emitted 
by  the  brain  as  sounds  are  by  the  mouth,  as  music  is 
by  the  organ,"  and  so  has  no  such  permanence  as 
the  bile  has.  It  is  a  breath  which  exists  as  long 
as  the  lungs  act,  but  which  vanishes  when  they 
cease  to  play.  Of  this  doctrine  it  may  be  said  that 
it  does  not  require  any  stretch  of  mind  to  understand 
it.  The  organ  plays  and  produces  music,  the  music 
of  Mozart  and  Beethoven  ;  the  brain  plays  and  pro- 
duces the  thought,  the  thoughts  of  Shakspeare  and 
Newton.  This  settles  every  thing,  and  avoids  all 
troublesome  questions.  And,  as  the  brain  does  not 
play  after  death,  so  there  is  no  proof  that  there  is 
any  mind  existing  after  the  dissolution  of  the  body. 

"To  sleep!  perchance  to  dream;  — ay,  there's  the  rub." 


190 


NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 


But  this  "  rub  "  is  polished  off,  for  when  the  brain 
is  dissolved  in  dust  the  power  of  dreaming  is  gone  ; 
and  the  most  wicked,  the  most  fleshl}^  materialist, 
who  has  seduced  one  fair  virgin  after  another,  need 
not  be  troubled  with  any  fear  as  to  the  second  death, 
or  the  worm  that  never  dies,  for  there  is  no  worm 
but  the  worm  that  feeds  on  the  body,  and  it  dies 
when  it  has  fed  on  the  body  and  reduced  it  to  cor- 
ruption. Biichner  quotes,  with  a  feeling  of  profound 
admiration,  the  saying  of  the  dissolute  Mirabeau  : 
"  Death  is  an  eternal  sleep." 

I  defer  to  a  later  part  of  ni}-  Lecture  the  argu- 
ments against  Materialism  in  every  form.  But  I 
cannot  avoid  the  exposure  of  this  weak  theory  when 
it  is  before  us.  We  can  comprehend  how  the  liver 
produces  bile  out  of  itself  and  the  matter  with 
which  it  comes  in  contact :  the  bile  is  the  result  of 
the  liver  and  the  matter  brought  to  the  liver,  and, 
no  doubt,  partakes  of  the  nature  of  both, — is,  in 
fact,  the  old  agents  in  a  new  form.  The  liver  has 
acted  on  the  matter,  and  bile  is  the  result.  But  when 
the  soft,  pulpy  substance,  the  brain,  is  supposed  to 
produce  thought,  there  is  surely  a  process  of  a  dif- 
ferent kind.  There  is  something  in  the  effect 
which  is  not  in  the  cause,  nor  in  any  of  the  constit- 
uents of  the  brain,  nor  in  all  the  constituents  put 
together.  "  Without  phosphorus,  no  thought,"  is 
one  of  the  axioms  of  the  school.  Later  and  more 
careful  inquiry  seems  to  show  that  phosphorus  is  not 
so  intimately  connected  with  thought  as  physiolo- 
gists have  been  accustomed  to  say  ;  but  if  phospho- 


MAUDES  LET.  19I 

rus  could  produce  thought,  —  say  the  rapt  visions 
of  Isaiah  or  Milton,  —  it  would  be  a  cause  producing 
an  effect  not  in  itself,  altogether  unlike  itself 

The  other  illustration,  that  from  the  organ  pro- 
ducing music,  is  more  plausible  for  Biichner's  pur- 
pose, as  it  might  seem  as  if  the  music  were  so  unlike 
the  instrument  from  which  it  comes.  But  we  have 
only  to  determine  precisely  what  it  is  that  the  organ 
produces,  to  find  the  loose  analogy  entirely  to  fail. 
What  the  organ  produces  is  simply  an  orderly  mo- 
tion. The  vibrations  in  the  tubes,  excited  by  the 
performer,  produce  a  certain  motion  in  the  air  which 
comes  to  our  ear.  This  is  really  all  that  is  done  by 
the  organ  :  it  is  a  vibradon  in  the  instrument,  pro- 
ducing a  vibration  in  the  external  air.  As  to  what 
follows  —  the  pleasant  sensation  in  the  ear,  and  the 
swelling  emotions  in  the  mind,  of  sympathy,  sor- 
row, joy,  or  admiration,  —  these  are  the  product, 
not  of  the  organ,  but  of  a  highly  organized  ear,  and 
a  finely  strung  mind.  The  motion  in  the  organ, 
producing  motion  in  the  air,  is  certainly  no  evi- 
dence that  the  brain  can  generate  thought. 

I  now  turn  to  a  much  more  refined  writer.  Dr. 
Maudesley  has  evidently  considerable  literary  abil- 
ity :  he  has  read  and  he  appreciates  Goethe,  and 
poets  generally,  specially  those  of  the  more  sen- 
suous school.  He  has  been  resident  physician  of 
the  Manchester  Royal  Lunadc  Hospital,  and  has 
studied  the  causes  of  insanity.  He  believes  that 
mental  insanity  arises  from  pathological  disturb- 
ances,—  in  short,  from  bodily  causes  ;   and  he  has 


192  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

evidently  searched  these  with  care,  and  has  brought 
under  our  notice,  in  his  "Physiology  and  Pathology 
of  Mind,"  a  curious  set  of  phenomena,  illustrating 
the  influence  of  a  diseased  brain  upon  the  operations 
of  the  mind.  But  he  has  been  guilty  of  the  inex- 
cusable blunder  of  supposing  that  when  he  has 
stated  these  things,  commonly  without  offering  any 
explanation  of  them,  he  has  explained  the  whole 
phenomena  of  the  mind.  He  is  like  one  who  would 
speculate  on  the  whole  constitution  of  Great  Britain 
or  the  United  States,  after  having  made  himself 
acquainted  with  the  cases  that  come  before  a  police 
court.  In  his  "  Body  and  Mind,"  being  Lectures 
delivered  before  the  Royal  College  of  Physicians, 
he  studiously  leaves  on  the  minds  of  his  medical 
hearers  the  impression  that  because  he  can  explain 
certain  morbid  affections  of  the  mind  by  bodily 
causes,  especially  at  the  critical  periods  of  life, 
therefore  he  can  account,  by  physiological  proc- 
esses, for  the  production  of  all  our  ideas,  senti- 
ments, beliefs,  and  judgments. 

He  is  for  ever  denouncing  the  old  metaphysics, 
and  all  who  would  study  the  mind  by  self-conscious- 
ness, or  internal  observation.  "Psychology  cannot, 
in  fact,  be  truly  inductive,  unless  it  is  studied  objec- 
tively ;  "  that  is,  physiologically,  in  the  brain  and 
nervous  system.  He  acknowledges,  "No  one  pre- 
tends that  physiology  can,  for  many  years  to  come, 
furnish  the  complete  data  of  a  positive  mental 
science  :  all  that  it  can  at  present  do  is  to  over- 
throw the  data  of  a  false   psychology."      I   agree 


CHARGE  AGAINST  CONSCIOUSNESS.       193 

with  him  that  physiology  has  not  been  able  to  con- 
struct a  mental  science ;  and  I  believe  it  will  never 
be  able  to  do  so,  —  though  it  may,  and  I  believe 
will,  greatly  aid  those  who  examine  the  mind  by 
self-consciousness.  But  he  thinks  it  has  undermined 
the  views  entertained  by  those  attached  to  the  old 
psychology.  In  particular,  he  thinks  that  he  can 
show  that  self-consciousness  deceives.  This  is  a  bold 
attempt,  and  has  seldom  been  made  by  any  phi- 
losopher. David  Hume  himself  was  too  shrewd 
to  try  to  cast  doubts  on  the  veracity  of  conscious- 
ness. Dr.  Maudesley's  charges  of  falsity  against 
self-consciousness  proceed  on  an  entire  misappre- 
hension of  the  nature  of  the  testimony  which  it 
gives.  He  makes  the  witness  lie,  only  by  pervert- 
ing his  declarations  and  making  him  say  what  he 
never  said.  "Consciousness  can  never  be  a  valid 
and  unprejudiced  witness  ;  for  although  it  testifies 
to  the  existence  of  a  particular  mental  modification, 
3^et,  when  that  modification  has  any  thing  of  a  mor- 
bid character,  consciousness  is  affected  by  the  taint 
and  is  morbid  also.  Accordingly,  the  lunatic  ap- 
peals to  the  evidence  of  his  own  consciousness  for 
the  truth  of  his  hallucination  or  delusion,  and  insists 
that  he  has  as  sure  evidence  of  its  reality  as  he  has 
of  the  argument  of  any  one  who  may  try  to  con- 
vince him  of  his  error  ;  and  is  he  not  right  from  a 
subjective  stand-point?  To  one  who  has  vertigo 
the  world  turns  round."  —  "  Is  it  not  supremely  ridic- 
ulous that,  while  we  cannot  trust  consciousness,  as 
to  whether  we  are  hot  or  cold,  we  should  be  content 

9 


194  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

to  rely  entirely  on  its  evidence  in  the  complex  phe- 
nomena of  our  highest  mental  activity?"*  This 
whole  statement  proceeds  on  so  entire  a  misappre- 
hension of  the  testimony  given  by  self-conscious- 
ness, that  the  student  of  philosoph}^  who  would  fall 
into  it  in  any  of  our  American  colleges  would 
infallibl}^  be  rejected  at  an,  examination.  Self-con- 
sciousness does  not  profess  to  reveal  what  is  passing 
without  us,  but  what  is  passing  within  ;  it  tells  us 
when  we  feel  cold  that  we  do  feel  cold  ;  but  cer- 
tainly does  not  say  at  what  point  the  thermometer 
stands.  It  testifies,  and  this  truly,  that  the  lunatic 
imagines  that  he  sees  a  figure,  but  does  not  say 
whether  this  figure  is  a  reality  or  a  spectre.  In 
trying  to  prove  that  consciousness  deceives,  Dr. 
Maudesley  has  only  shown  that  he  has  been  deceived 
himself,  and  is  seeking  to  deceive  us,  by  an  entire 
misapprehension  of  what  consciousness  says. 

He  has  thus  failed,  utterly  and  palpably,  in  show- 
ing that  consciousness  is  a  liar.  The  greatest  scep- 
tics have  allowed  that  we  must  trust  consciousness. 
And  so  we  will  trust  it,  notwithstanding  Dr.  Maudes- 
ley's  allegations  against  it.  And  there  is  one  point 
on  which  consciousness  speaks,  and  speaks  authori- 
tatively, and  will  allow  no  man  to  think  or  believe 
otherwise.  It  declares  clearly  and  unequivocally 
that  man  is  a  fcrson^  a  distinct  person,  —  distinct 
from  all  other  persons  and  all  other  objects,  —  dis- 
tinct from  the  nerves  and  cells  of  the  brain.  It 
declares,  too,  —  with  the  aid  of  memory,  —  that  there 

*  Physiology  and  Pathology  of  Mind,  p.  25. 


UNITY  OF   THE   SOUL.  195 

is  a  unity  and  identity  of  person,  that  I  am  the 
same  to-day  as  I  was  yesterday,  —  the  same  now  as 
I  was  as  far  back  as  memory  can  go.  It  asserts  of 
itself,  amid  all  shiftings  of  surrounding  circum- 
stances, amid  all  changes  in  the  body  or  in  the 
brain,  that  it  is  one  and  the  same.  Whatever  else 
is  true,  this  is  and  must  be  true  ;  and  we  cannot  be 
made  to  believe  or  think  otherwise. 

Dr.  Maudesley  sets  himself  determinedly  against 
the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  soul.  It  is  a  unity 
only  as  a  house  is  one,  as  a  tree  is  one.  A  house  is 
one  only  by  the  collocation  of  its  several  parts,  — 
timbers,  nails,  and  slates  :  a  tree  is  one  only  by  the 
co-operation  of  its  component  elements  and  mem- 
bers. So  the  soul  is  one  only  by  the  combination 
and  co-operation  of  the  brain-cells,  and  is  in  fact 
composed  of  essentially  different  elements,  or  parts, 
which  shift  from  year  to  year,  — in  fact,  from  moment 
to  moment ;  and  its  whole  unity  may  be  dissolved 
by  the  dissolution  of  the  brain-cells,  which  are  its 
constituents.  It  is  vain  to  expect  an  immortality 
for  such  a  soul  when  the  parts  are  separated  by  the 
death  of  the  body  ;  in  fact,  any  unity  which  it  has 
in  this  life  is  altogether  fictitious  and  delusive. 
Now,  in  all  this,  Dr.  Maudesley  is  opposing  an 
intuitive  conviction  of  the  mind  as  to  the  unity  and 
personality  of  self,  which  is  far  more  certain  than 
any  truth  he  has  been  able  to  establish  by  physio- 
logical investigation.  This  conviction  at  once  sets 
aside  —  I  do  not  say  any  physiological  fact  —  but 
the    perversely    wrong    inferences    which    he    has 


196  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

drawn  from  his  facts,  by  refusing  to  combine  the 
evidence  of  self-consciousness  with  the  evidence 
got  from  the  senses. 

Dr.  Maudesley  identifies  the  brain-cells,  and  the 
forces  operating  in  them,  with  mental  operations. 
Somehow  or  other  (he  is  at  no  pains  to  tell  us  how) 
the  action  produced  in  the  body  by  external  ob- 
jects —  say  by  a  rose  or  lily  before  us  —  goes  up  into 
the  brain-case  with  its  cells,  and  there  becomes 
thoughts,  fancies,  feelings.  Then  he  has  a  theory 
about  these  ideas  and  feelings  leaving  behind  them 
certain  residua,  which  become  organized  in  the 
nervous  centres.  These  residua  play,  with  him,  a 
very  important  part ;  in  fact,  come  to  constitute  the 
Ego,  to  constitute  what  is  permanent  in  mind.  The 
whole  process  of  manufacturing  ideas  in  this  brain 
work-shop  becomes,  with  him,  a  ver}^  simple  one. 
See  how  easily  they  appear,  —  as  easily  as  sheets 
from  a  paper  mill :  "As  in  reflex  action  of  the  spinal 
cord,  the  residual  force,  which  was  over  and  above 
what  passed  directly  outwards  in  the  reaction,  trav- 
elled upwards  to  the  sensoritnn  commune  and  excited 
sensation ;  and  as  in  sensori-motor  action  the  resid- 
ual force,  which  was  over  and  above  what  passed 
outwards  in  the  reaction,  travelled  up  to  the  cortical 
cells,  and  gave  rise  to  an  idea  :  so  in  ideational 
action  [that  is,  the  formation  of  ideas]  the  force 
which  does  not  pass,  or  the  residual  force  which 
may  be  over  and  above  what  does  pass  immediately 
outwards  in  the  reaction,  abides  in  action  in  the  cor- 
tical centres,  and  passes  therein  from  cell  to  cell." 


BRAIN-CELLS  AND    THOUGHT.  1 97 

Thus  he  makes  "  the  formation  of  an  idea  an  organic 
process."  It  is  strange  that  so  accomplished  a  man 
does  not  see  what  unfilled-up  gaps  there  are  in  this 
theoretical  process.  A  man  has  before  him  the 
grave  of  Washington.  There  is  a  mound  of  earth 
with  grass  upon  it :  rays  of  light  come  from  it,  and 
form  an  image  on  the  retina  of  the  eye,  which  raises 
an  action  in  the  optic  nerve.  This  is  all  the  length 
that  the  physiologist  can  trace  it.  But  Dr.  Maudes- 
ley  can  carry  it  up  to  the  brain-cells,  and  turn  it 
into  an  idea  of  the  mound  of  earth  and  grass  ;  can 
make  it  declare  that  this  is  a  grave,  and  Washing- 
ton's grave  ;  and  then  become  a  thought  of  his  calm, 
unerring  judgment,  and  his  disinterested  patriotism, 

all  by  a  current  which,  while  it  travels  on,  finds 

that  it  is  stayed,  and,  as  it  is  stayed,  finds  that  what 
"does  not  pass,  or  the  residual  force  which  may  be 
over  and  above,"  becomes  an  idea  of  Washington's 
grave,  and  Washington  himself,  and  his  military 
and  administrative  skill,  with  an  admiration  of  his 
unselfish  character  and  high  aims.  When  sheets 
of  paper  come  out  of  the  paper-mill,  we  have  only 
what  was  potentially  in  the  rags,  with  the  water  and 
the  other  matters  employed  to  purify  them  ;  but  here 
we  have  rays  of  light,  that  is,  vibrations  of  air  reach- 
ing the  eye,  and  these  come  out  the  approbation  of 
duty  and  of  goodness.  Verily,  this  beats  the  most 
astonishing  trick  ever  performed  by  necromancer, 
when  he  turns  a  rod  into  a  serpent ;  or  by  juggler, 
when  he  puts  in  a  piece  of  cloth  into  a  bag  and  it 
becomes  an  ^gg,  or  puts  in  an  ^.gg  and  brings  out  a 


198  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

fowl.  People  trained  in  a  rigid,  inductive  logic  will 
insist  that  there  must  be  steps  in  this  process  which 
he  has  kept  out  of  sight ;  that  there  is  a  w^ide  interval 
between  a  residual  physical  force  left  in  cells,  and 
the  idea  of  consistency  of  character,  and  singleness 
of  purpose,  and  beneficence  of  intention.  Yet  this 
is  the  cool  way  in  which  he  forms  our  ideas,  even 
the  highest :  "  The  cells  of  the  central  ganglia  do  in 
reality  idealize  [that  is,  form  ideas  out  of]  the  sen- 
sory perceptions,  grasping  what  is  essential  in  them, 
and  suppressing  or  rejecting  the  unessential :  they 
mould  them  by  their  plastic  faculty  into  the  organic 
unity  of  an  idea,  in  accordance  with  fundamental 
laws."  I  would  like  to  know^  how  brain-cells  should 
know^  what  is  "  essential "  in  Washington's  charac- 
ter, and  reject  the  "unessential."  It  all  takes  place 
"in  accordance  w^ith  fundamental  laws;"  but  these 
laws  are  of  a  very  different  kind  from  those  of  gan- 
glia and  cells  :  they  are,  in  fact,  mental  and  not 
material  law^s.  He  might  do  well  to  attend  to  the 
more  scientific  statement  of  Professor  T}- ndall :  "  I 
do  not  think  that  the  materialist  is  entitled  to  say 
that  his  molecular  grouping  and  his  molecular  mo- 
tions explain  every  thing.  In  reality,  they  explain 
nothing.  The  utmost  he  can  affirm  is  the  associa- 
tion of  the  tw^o  classes  of  phenomena,  of  wdiose  real 
bond  of  union  he  is  in  absolute  ignorance.  The 
problem  of  the  connection  of  soul  and  body  is  as 
insoluMe  in  its  modern  form  as  it  w^as  in  the  pre- 
scientiric  ages." 

We  now  turn  to  a  higher  school  of  materialists, 


ACTIVITT  OF  MATTER. 


199 


who  will  not,  for  various  reasons,  let  themselves  be 
called  materialists,  not  onl}^  from  the  unhappy  asso- 
ciations of  the  name,  but  from  profounder  reasons. 
Some  of  them  will  not  allow  themselves  to  be  so 
denominated  because  they  do  not  take  the  gross 
views  of  matter  which  are  generally  entertained. 
We  have  found  Professor  Tyndall  referring  to  this 
when  he  finds  a  difficulty  in  getting  mind  out  of  star 
dust.  Matter,  say  the  whole  of  the  school  I  am  now 
referring  to,  is  something  vastly  higher  in  itself  than 
what  it  is  supposed  to  be  in  the  popular  apprehen- 
sions gendered  by  religious  prejudices,  which  repre- 
sent the  body  and  matter  as  altogether  inert  and 
vile  and  despicable.  Matter,  they  show,  has  high 
qualities  :  it  has  immense,  indeed  immeasurable, 
activity,  and  lofty  powers  of  attraction  and  repul- 
sion and  assimilation  ;  and  they  hint,  if  they  do  not 
assert,  that  it  may  have  the  power  of  fashioning 
ideas  and  pronouncing  judgments,  moral  and  intel- 
lectual. Now  I  admit  freely  that  matter  is  not  that 
inert  substance  which  it  has  often  been  represented 
as  being.  Matter  has  essential  activities  :  its  atoms 
and  its  worlds  are  in  a  state  of  continual  motion. 
The  earth,  sun,  and  moon,  and  stars  are  all  flying 
through  space  with  incredible  velocity ;  and  within 
every  piece  of  earth,  stone,  and  wood,  there  is  as 
constant  a  motion  of  the  particles  as  there  is  of  the 
planets  in  their  orbits,  or  of  bees  in  the  hive.  Every 
change  of  heat  in  the  temperature  of  a  room  makes 
a  change  in  the  internal  structure  of  every  object  in 
it.     I  give  up  the  idea  of  matter  being  passive.    And 


20O  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

I  repudiate  the  idea  that  our  bodies  are  only  the 
sources  of  evil,  and  to  be  despised.  This  notion  came 
from  certain  Eastern  theosophists,  and  was  adopted 
by  certain  Christian  mystics,  and  sanctioned  by  the 
Church  in  the  ages  when  monasticism  prevailed ; 
but  is  not  countenanced  in  Scripture,  which  repre- 
sents the  body  as  one  of  the  constituents  of  man, 
which  gives  Christ  a  body,  and  unites  soul  and 
body  at  the  resurrection,  in  order  to  enjoy  full  frui- 
tion. I  do  not  seek  to  lower  or  disparage  the  capac- 
ities of  body.  I  believe  it  has  properties  many  and 
various.  But  there  is  no  proof  that  thinking  is  one 
of  these  properties.  We  have  seen  in  Lecture  IV., 
fii'st^  that  we  know  body  and  mind  by  different 
organs  :  we  know  body  by  the  senses ;  we  know 
mind  by  self-consciousness.  We  cannot  perceive 
mind,  or  thought,  or  moral  sentiment,  by  the  eye, 
the  ear,  the  touch,  or  any  of  the  senses.  And  then, 
secondly^  we  know  them  as  possessing  different 
properties.  We  know  body  as  extended  in  three 
dimensions,  and  resisting  our  energy  and  the  en- 
trance of  another  body  into  the  same  space.  But 
we  do  not  know  mind  as  having  length,  breadth, 
and  thickness,  and  as  either  penetrable  or  impene- 
trable. Again,  we  know  mind  as  perceiving, 
judging,  reasoning,  desiring,  willing,  and  we  do 
not  know  matter  as  exercising  these  qualities.  As 
knowing  them  thus  by  different  organs,  and  as  dif- 
ferent in  themselves,  if  there  are  any  who  hold  them 
to  be  the  same,  the  burden  of  proof  must  lie  on 
Ihem.     And  they  cannot  prove  this  by  so  spiritual- 


SPIRITUALIZING    OF  BODY.  20I 

izing  matter  as  to  make  it  discharge  the  functions 
of  mind.  However  etherealized,  matter  is  still  mat- 
ter, still  occupies  space,  still  resists  our  energ}',  has 
bulk  and  shape,  can  be  weighed  and  measured ; 
and  there  is  no  proof  that  it  can  form  ideas,  —  say 
the  ideas  of  the  true,  the  beautiful,  and  the  good. 

In  fact,  those  who  profess  thus  to  spiritualize  mat- 
ter so  as  to  make  it  capable  of  performing  mental 
operations,  so  as  to  make  it  capable  of  constructing 
the  poetry  of  Homer  and  Dante,  and  the  sciences 
of  astronomy   and   mathematics,   are   found  in   the 
end  to  confine  its  powers  within  the  very  narrowest 
limits  ;  in  fact,  making  it  possess  merely  the  power 
of  molecular  motion  under  forces  which  are,  after 
all,  merely  the  sum  of  the  motion,  real  or  potential. 
"All  vital   action,"  says   Professor   Huxley,  "is   the 
result  of   the   molecular    forces   of   the   protoplasm 
which  displays  it."     He  adds,  "And,  if  so,  it  must 
be  true,  in  the  same  sense  and  to  the  same  extent, 
that  the  thoughts  to  which   I   am   giving  utterance, 
and  your  thoughts  regarding  them,  are  the  expression 
of  molecular  changes  in  that  matter  of  life,  which 
is  the   source  of  our  other  vital   phenomena  ; "  and 
he  says  that  "  even  those  manifestations  of  intellect, 
of  feeling,  and  of  will,  which  we  rightly  name  the 
higher  faculties,"  are  known,  "to  every  one  but  the 
subject  of   them,"   only   as  "transitory   changes  in 
the'  relative    positions    of   the    part    of   the    body." 
Upon  this  I  say  that  the   subject   of   them   knows 
them  to  be  difterent ;  and,  as  knowing  them  to  be 
different  in  himself,  he  knows  them  to  be  something 

9* 


202  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

higher  in  others  than  "  mere  changes  in  the  relative 
positions  of  the  body."  But  I  quote  the  language 
to  show  what  is  to  be  the  end  scientifically  of  all 
this  pretended  spiritualizing  of  the  body  :  it  ends  in 
making  thought  molecular  change,  and  mind  —  like 
heat  —  a  mode  of  motion.  This  is  the  issue  scien- 
tifically ;  and  the  end  practically  will  be  to  make 
man  to  see  and  argue,  that  he  has  no  evidence  of 
the  immortality  of  the  soul ;  and  believing  that,  he 
is  a  mere  throb  in  the  pulse  of  life,  a  mere  bubble  on 
the  ever-moving  stream  of  time  :  he  will  feel  as  if  all 
he  had  to  do  was  to  dance  along  as  gayly  as  possi- 
ble, and  get  as  many  of  the  enjoyments  of  this 
world  as  he  can,  using  as  his  motto  and  practical 
maxim,  "Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we 
die." 

But  Professor  Huxley  says  he  is  no  materialist.* 
"I,  individually,  am  no  materialist;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary, believe  materialism  to  involve  grave  philo- 
sophic error."  This  brings  me  to  the  second  ground 
on  which  these  men  decline  to  be  called  materialists  : 
it  is  because  they  believe  neither  in  mind  nor  matter 
as  substances.  "For,  after  all,  what  do  we  know  of 
this  terrible  ^  matter,'  except  as  a  name  for  the  un- 
known and  hypothetical  cause  of  states  of  our  own 
consciousness  ?  And  what  do  we  know  of  that "  spirit ' 
over  whose  threatened  extinction  by  matter  a  great 
lamentation  is  arising,  like  that  which  was  heard  at 
the  death  of  Pan,  —  except  that  it  is  also  a  name  for 
an  unknown  and  hypothetical  cause  or  condition  of 

*  Physical  Basis  of  Life. 


HUXLET  A   HUM  I  ST.  203 

the  states  of  consciousness  ?  "  You  will  see  now  more 
fully  the  object  I  had  in  view  in  discussing  the  sub- 
ject of  Nescience  in  Lecture  IV.  of  this  course, 
and  the  importance  of  showing  that  we  know  both 
mind  and  matter  as  having  real  existence  and  power 
and  permanence.  Mr.  Huxley,  in  a  Lecture  on 
Descartes,  of  whose  profound  philosophy  he  has  a 
very  superficial  appreciation,  tells  us:  "Nor  is  our 
knowledge  of  any  thing  we  know  or  feel  more  or 
less  than  a  knowledge  of  states  of  consciousness." 
"Strictly  speaking  the  existence  of  a  'self  and  of 
a  '  not  self  are  hypotheses  by  which  we  account  for 
the  facts  of  consciousness."  I  have  labored  to  show, 
by  an  appeal  to  consciousness,  that  we  have  quite 
as  direct  and  immediate  and  certain  knowledge  of 
"  self"  as  we  have  of  the  "  states  of  self."  We  never 
do  know  a  state  of  consciousness,  except  as  a  state 
of  self.  On  the  ground  on  which  we  deny  the  one, 
we  may  deny  the  other.  If  we  affirm  the  one,  we 
ought  also  to  affirm  the  other.  Some  persons  have 
been  put  into  a  state  of  high  ecstasy  because  Mr. 
Huxley  has  so  decidedly  declared  that  he  is  no  mate- 
rialist- But  he  is  no  materialist  simply  in  this  sense  : 
that,  as  he  frankly  acknowledges,  he  is  a  Humist, 
believing  neither  in  matter  nor  spirit,  except  as 
"hypothetical  assumptions  of  the  highest  practical 
value."  But  then,  unlike  Hume,  he  uses,  as  he 
confesses,  a  "materialistic  terminology,"  which  will 
be  understood,  as  it  has  in  fact  been  understood, 
by  his  readers  in  a  materialistic  sense,  which  will 
leave  its  practical  impression.     He  is  no  materialist, 


204  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

he  proclaims ;  but  let  all  men  observe  that  he  falls 
back  on  a  "physical  basis"  of  life  and  of  mind.  I 
do  not  see  that,  logically  and  consistently,  he  has 
a  right  to  call  in  any  sort  of  basis.  But  men's 
instincts  are  stronger  than  their  speculative  opin- 
ions ;  and  he  has  fallen  back  on  a  basis,  and  makes 
this  basis  not  spiritual,  as  spiritualists  do,  but  phys- 
ical. What  he  has  done  scientificall}^  the  mob  of 
sensual  men  will  do  practically,  and  will  believe  ;.n 
nothing  but  what  has  a  physical  basis,  but  what 
can  be  seen  and  felt.  The  office  of  the  positive 
philosophy  w411  turn  out  in  the  eixd  to  be  to  sanction, 
in  the  name  of  a  philosophy,  what  is  not  a  philos- 
ophy, but  wishes  to  call  itself  a  philosophy.  This 
materialism,  whether  it  calls  itself  materialism  or 
not,  w^ill  be  more  or  less  refined  according  to  the 
character  of  the  minds  that  adopt  it,  —  more  artistic 
and  dilettante  among  the  refined,  coarse  and  licen- 
tious among  the  vulgar. 

The  materialists  of  the  higher  sort  all  admit  that 
there  is  such  a  thing  as  thought,  or  mind,  and  that 
the  properties  of  mind  are  different  from  those  of 
ordinary  matter.  But,  in  one  way  or  other,  they 
identify  thought  with  material  agency.  The  conclu- 
sion to  which  Professor  Bain  comes,  after  a  historical 
survey  of  opinions,  is  :  "The  arguments  for  the  two 
substances  have,  we  believe,  now  entirely  lost  their 
force  :  they  are  no  longer  compatible  with  ascer- 
tained science  and  clear  thinkincr.  The  one  sub- 
stance,  with  two  sets  of  properties,  two  sides,  — the 
physical  side   and   the  mental  side,  a  double-faced 


PROFESSOR    BAIN. 


205 


unity,  —  would  appear  to  comply  with  all  the  exi- 
gencies of  the  case."  *  "Two  sides"  is,  at  best,  a 
metaphorical  phrase,  and  is  altogether  material- 
istic. It  is  not  easy  to  see  how  benevolence,  or  the 
idea  of  goodness,  can  be  one  side  of  a  substance, 
while  the  other  side  may  be  heat  or  figure.  Mr. 
Bain  is  fond  of  introducing  anatomical  descriptions 
in  the  midst  of  psychological  investigations,  and 
in  doing  so  leaves  the  impression  that  he  has 
accounted  for  intellectual  or  emotional  operations 
by  organic  afi:ections.  But  there  is  ever  a  wide  and 
an  unfilled-up  gap  between  the  bones,  muscles,  and 
nerves,  which  he  describes  from  books  of  anatomy, 
and  the  comparisons,  emotions,  and  resolutions  of 
the  mind.  Even  when  he  is  successful  in  showing 
that  a  sensation  originates  in  an  organic  affection, 
he  fails  to  mark  the  difference  between  the  orpfanic 
action  and  sensation,  and  he  utterly  fails  in  show- 
ing how  our  ideas  —  how  our  higher  ideas,  such  as 
those  of  duty  and  charity  —  can  arise  out  of,  or  be 
identified  with,  cell-force,  or  brain-force.  His  divis- 
ion of  the  Faculties  of  the  Mind  is  into  the  Senses 
and  the  Intellect,  the  Emotions  and  the  Will.  His 
division  is,  in  my  opinion,  a  defective  one.  It 
allots  no  separate  place  to  the  Moral  Faculty,  and 
it  embraces  under  Feeling  two  such  diverse  phe- 
nomena as  sensations  of  pleasure  and  pain,  and  the 
mental  emotions  of  fear,  hope,  and  love.  But  such 
as  it  is,  it  is  a  division  formed  by  contemplation  of 
the  workings  of  the  conscious  mind,  and  not  by  the 

*  Fortnightly  Review,  May,  1866. 


2o6  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

observation  of  the  nerves,  the  cells,  or  brain,  which 
can  tell  of  no  such  distinctions.  No  one  acquainted 
with  later  physiology  will  maintain  that  he  has 
discovered  one  part  of  the  brain,  or  one  set  of 
agencies  in  the  brain,  devoted  to  the  Intellect, 
another  to  Feeling,  a  third  to  Will.  He  narrows 
very  much  the  functions  of  the  Intellect :  he  admits 
that  the  mind  has  the  power  of  perceiving  resem- 
blances and  differences  ;  but  he  has  not  shown  that 
such  comparison, — the  comparison,  for  instance, 
which  groups  nature  into  a  grand  system,  —  is  the 
product,  or  even  the  concomitant,  of  a  group  of 
cells,  or  of  co-ordinated  nerve  currents. 

I  am  unwilling  to  look  upon  Professor  Tyndall  as 
a  materialist,  especially  after  his  defence  of  the  exist- 
ence —  he  does  not  say  the  separate  existence  —  of 
mind.  His  language  is  guarded  :  he  speaks  of  the 
phenomena  of  mind  being  ever  "  associated  "  with 
those  of  matter,  and  of  their  "  appearing  together." 
"  In  affirming  that  the  growth  of  the  body  is  me- 
chanical, and  that  thought,  as  exercised  by  us,  has 
its  correlative  in  the  physics  of  the  brain,  I  think 
the  position  of  the  materialist  is  stated  as  far  as  that 
position  is  a  tenable  one.  I  think  the  materialist 
will  be  able  finally  to  maintain  this  position  against 
all  attacks.''  And  he  argues,  in  behalf  of  "the 
extreme  probability  of  the  hypothesis,  that  for  every 
fact  of  consciousness,  whether  in  the  domain  of 
sense,  of  thought,  or  of  emotion,  a  certain  definite 
molecular  condition  is  set  up  in  the  brain  ;  that  this 
relation   of  physics  to  consciousness  is   invariable, 


PROFESSOR    Tl'NDALL.  207 

SO  that,  given  the  state  of  the  brain,  the  correspond- 
ing thought  or  feeling  might  be  inferred,  or,  given 
the  thought  or  feehng,  the  corresponding  state  of 
the  brain  might  be  inferred."  *    Some  of  these  state- 
ments  seem  to   me   to  go   beyond   what   has   been 
determined    either   by    physiology    or   psychology. 
When    the    poor     man    refuses     the    bribe    prof- 
fered  him   in   his   hour  of  need ;  when  the   patriot 
resolves  to  die  for  his  country,  which  he  is  thus  able 
to  save  ;  when  the  Christian  cherishes  the  hope  of 
heaven  in  the  most  trying  circumstances,  —  I  have  no 
proof  that  any  one  could  discover  all  this  by  simply 
looking  at  the  state  of  the  brain.     In  the  interests 
of  science,   as  well  as  of  philosophy  and  religion, 
the  rash  statements  of  these  men  must  be  corrected. 
All  attempts  to  localize  the  different  faculties  in 
different  parts  of  the   brain,  or  connect  them  with 
special  nerves,  cells,  or  currents,  have  utterly  failed. 
Some  have  held  that  the  anterior  lobes  of  the  brain 
are  the  seat  of  the  higher  faculties,  and  the  upper 
and  posterior  lobes   the   seat  of  the  emotions  ;  but 
no  scientific  man  in  our  day  will  venture  to  say  that 
this  has  been  scientifically  established  ;   and  even  if 
it  were  established,  it  would  merely  prove  that  in- 
tellect is  more  intimately  connected  with  one  part 
of  the   brain,  and  emotion  with   another.     Of  late 
years,  M.  Broca  has  endeavored  to  show  "that  the 
third  frontal  convolution  of  the  left  hemisphere  of 
the  brain  is  the  seat  of  language  ;  "  but  others  dis- 
pute this,  and  urge  facts  which  appear  to  be  incon- 

*  Address  before  British  Association. 


2o8  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

sistent  with  it.  "  On  the  whole," says  Dr.  Maudesley, 
"  it  must  be  confessed  that,  so  far,  w^e  have  not  any 
certain  and  definite  knowledge  of  the  functions  of 
the  different  parts  of  the  cerebral  convolutions.  The 
anatomists  cannot  even  agree  on  any  convolution  as 
peculiar  to  man  :  all  that  they  can  surely  say  is, 
that  his  convolutions  are  more  complex  and  less 
symmetrical  than  those  of  the  monkey."* 

After  this  critical  survey,  I  am  prepared  to  lay 
down  a  few  positions  fitted  to  meet  Materialism, 
whether  of  the  grosser  or  more  refined  form. 

(i)  There  is  the  consciousness  of  the  Person- 
ality and  the  Unity  of  the  Mind.  I  have  no  such 
conviction  in  regard  to  any  material  object.  I  can- 
not open  my  eyes  without  seeing  the  objects  before 
me,  —  that  hill  and  that  tree;  and  I  know  them  to 
exist,  but  I  do  not  regard  them  as  having  a  specific 
personalit}^  I  can  easily  believe  that  the  particles 
that  compose  them  may  be  constantly  changing, 
and  that  they  may  be  broken  up  and  become  other 
things,  mud  or  mould.  But  I  believe,  and  must 
ever  believe,  myself  to  have  an  individuality  different 
not  only  from  that  hill  and  that  tree,  but  from  that 
changing  body  of  mine,  from  those  nerves  and  cells 
and  brain  currents.  I  can  believe,  on  evidence  be- 
ing produced,  that  these  parts  of  the  body  are  inti- 
mately connected  with  mental  action  ;  I  can  believe 
that  every  particle  of  my  body  may  be  changed  in 
seven  years  ;  but  meanwhile  I  am  as  assured  as 
ever  that  I  who  think  am  different  from  that  organ 

*  Physiology  and  Pathology  of  Mind,  p.  125. 


LA  WS    OF  MIND.  209 

which  I  think  about,  and  that  I  have  a  personality 
such  as  is  not  possessed  by  the  cells  or  vesicles  of 
the  brain. 

(2)  The  mind  follows  laws  of  its  own,  which  are 
not  laws  of  matter.  The  laws  of  body  are  such  as 
these  :  that  matter  attracts  other  matter ;  that  the 
elements  combine  in  certain  definite  proportions ; 
that  organized  bodies  exercise  such  functions  as 
assimilation  and  absorption.  But  there  are  laws  of 
mind  quite  as  clearly  and  certainly  established  as 
those  of  matter.  In  the  very  act  of  knowing  matter, 
mind  is  exercising  a  property  very  different  from 
any  property  of  the  matter  observed  by  it.  In  the 
exercise  of  the  senses,  the  perception  of  the  figure 
of  a  body  is  very  different  from  the  figure.  Then 
the  soul  in  all  its  actings  has  a  consciousness  of  an 
abiding  self  which  it  can  never  get  rid  of.  In 
memory,  it  looks  back  upon  the  past,  and  recog- 
nizes objects  and  events  not  now  before  it.  In 
imagination,  it  can  picture  new  and  fairer  scenes 
than  any  reality,  and  rise  in  the  contemplation  tow- 
ards the  good  and  the  perfect.  Even  in  association 
of  ideas,  there  is  more  than  bodily  laws;  as,  for 
instance,  when  like  suggests  like,  when  a  scene 
before  us  suggests  a  far  distant  one.  In  every 
judgment  there  is  comparison,  —  a  comparison  of 
two  things,  one  of  which  may  not  be  present, 
neither  of  which  may  be  present ;  and  in  our  higher 
judgments  we  may  connect  things  by  very  refined 
analogies.  The  nature  of  reasoning  has  been 
known  since  the  time  of  Aristotle ;  and,  with  a  few 


2IO  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

slight  differences,  there  is  a  wonderful  agreement 
among  logicians  as  to  the  law  which  regulates  it. 
The  principle  underl^^ng  the  whole  is,  that  what- 
ever may  be  predicated  of  a  class  may  be  predi- 
cated of  all  that  is  contained  in  that  class.  Or  take 
the  laws  of  the  moral  faculties  :  as  when  the  soul 
contemplates  an  immoral  act,  —  say  the  murder  of 
a  father,  —  and  condemns  it,  and  proclaims  that 
right  is  supreme,  and  that  every  thing  should  give 
way  before  it.  The  laws  of  the  emotions  are  as  well 
established  as  those  of  the  material  universe  ;  as, 
for  instance,  the  law  that  feeling  depends  on  a 
previous  idea  or  conception  of  good  or  evil.  The 
consciousness  of  free-will,  the  feeling  of  obligation 
and  of  responsibility,  these  may  be  dependent,  in 
an  inferior  sense,  on  a  concurrent  organism,  but 
they  rise  to  an  infinitely  higher  region.  These  are 
laws  as  certainly  and  definitely  established  as  the 
law  of  gravitation  or  of  chemical  afiinity  or  vital 
assimilation.  But  these  are  not  laws  of  body,  of 
motion,  or  of  molecules,  or  electricity,  or  magnet- 
ism, or  vital  absorption,  but  differ  from  them  as 
widely  as  we  can  conceive  one  thing  to  differ  from 
another. 

(3)  Mind  cannot  be  shown  to  be  one  of  the  cor- 
related physical  forces.  I  have  already  noticed  the 
grand  truth  established  in  our  da}^,  that  the  sum  of 
physical  force  in  the  universe  is  always  one  and  the 
same  ;  and  that  all  the  varied  forces,  mechanical, 
chemical,  and  electric,  and  probably  the  vital,  are 
modifications  of  that  one  force.    This  can  be  shown 


THOUGHT  NOT  MEASURABLE.  211 

as  to  each  of  the  forces  by  weighing  it.  Mr.  Joule, 
of  Manchester,  showed  that  772  pounds  faUing 
through  one  foot  produces  sufficient  heat  to  raise 
one  pound  of  water  1°  F.  ;  and  they  speak  of  the 
mechanical  equivalent  of  heat  as  being  772  foot 
pounds.  Now  some  have  insinuated,  and  some  have 
asserted,  that  mind  is  merely  one  of  the  correlated 
physical  forces.  But  ■prima  facie  there  is  one 
grand  dithculty  in  the  way  of  establishing  this  doc- 
trine, in  the  fact  that,  even  if  it  were  true,  we  have 
no  means  of  proving  it, —  certainly  no  such  means  as 
we  have  of  proving  that  heat  is  one  of  the  correlated 
forces.  Scientific  men  can  measure  heat  and  the 
other  physical  forces  —  we  can  measure  the  degrees 
of  heat  produced  by  the  fall  of  a  pound  so  many  feet ; 
but  we  cannot  weigh  or  measure  thought  or  feeling 
or  will.  This  is  a  fact  which  shows  at  once  the 
essential  difference  between  the  two,  between  body 
and  mind.  The  barometer  has  not  yet  been  con- 
structed which  will  measure  the  weight  of  a  thought, 
—  say  the  thought  of  Sir  Isaac  Newton  when  he 
got  the  first  glimpse  of  the  law  of  gravitation.  We 
have  yet  to  find  a  thermometer  which  w'ill  measure 
the  intensity  of  love  on  the  part  of  a  mother  for 
her  boy  when  he  is  beinor  torn  from  her  to  ^o  to  a 
distant  land,  or  expiring  before  her  eyes  ;  or  the 
love  of  a  Christian,  —  say  the  Apostle  John  —  for 
his  Saviour. 

Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  tells  us,*  "That  no  idea  or 
feeling   arises,    save   as   a  result  of   some  physical 

*  First  Principles,  p.  217. 


212  NATURAL    THEOLOGT. 

force  expended  in  producing  it,  is  fast  becoming 
a  common-place  of  science ;  and  whoever  only 
weighs  the  evidence  will  see,  that  nothing  but  an 
overwhelming  bias  in  favor  of  a  pre-conceived 
theory  can  explain  its  non-acceptance."  This  is 
by  no  means  a  correct  expression  of  the  facts.  Let 
us  carcfull}^  observe  what  actually  takes  place.  A 
mother  receives  a  letter  intimating  the  death  of  a 
son.  The  paper  with  the  black  strokes  on  it  is  all 
that  falls  under  the  senses ;  but  the  mind  at  once 
apprehends  the  meaning,  and  the  idea  of  the  loss 
so  affects  the  mother  that,  after  violent  outbursts 
of  grief,  she  is  left  thoroughly  exhausted.  Now 
there  is  no  evidence  that  all  this  anxious  thought 
and  sorrowful  feeling  is  the  "  result  of  some  phys- 
ical force  expended."  What  follows  the  simple  per- 
ception by  the  senses  is  a  mental  operation,  an  idea 
of  the  loss  of  a  beloved  son  arising  according  to 
psychical  and  not  physical  laws.  This  is  seen 
more  clearly  when  the  aifection  is  produced  solely 
by  internal  contemplation,  without  any  external 
occasion ;  as  when  on  reflecting  on  our  past  con- 
duct we  feel  that  we  have  done  wrong,  and  expe- 
rience the  qualms  of  conscience.  True,  these 
mental  states  exercise  an  influence  on  the  brain, 
whereby  brain  force  is  expended  and  physical 
prostration  is  the  result.  But  the  grief  of  the 
mother,  the  condemnation  of  the  conscience,  is  not 
the  result  of  a  physical  force  expended.  The 
expenditure  of  the  physical  force  laid  up  in  the 
brain   is   rather    the    result   of    the    strong    mental 


PROFESSOR  BARKER, 


213 


affection  which  has  risen  up  according  to  the  laws 
of  mind. 

An  American  chemist  has  made  an  attempt  to 
prove  that  mental  force  is  one  of  the  correlated 
forces.*  The  facts  on  which  he  proceeds  are  said 
to  be  these  :  There  are  states  of  mental  torpor  in 
which  the  galvanic  needle  applied  to  the  brain  may 
remain  stationary  for  hours.  "But  let  a  person 
knock  on  the  door  outside  the  room,  or  speak  a  sin- 
gle word,  even  though  the  experimenter  remained 
absolutely  passive,  and  the  reception  of  the  intelli- 
gence caused  the  needle  to  swing  through  twenty 
degrees."  Dr.  Barker  has  not  seen  what  is  involved 
in  this  fact.  The  person  was  passive  in  respect  of 
bodily  action ;  but,  upon  the  knock  or  the  word 
reaching  him,  the  mind  was  startled  into  action. 
Now  here  we  have,  first,  a  thought  produced  by  the 
knock,  or,  rather,  by  the  apprehension  in  the  mind 
of  the  knock.  This  thought  was  not  the  product 
of  physical  laws,  but  of  mental  laws,  —  an  idea 
awakened  by  an  intimation  of  the  senses,  coming 
suddenly  and  unexpectedly.  The  idea,  or  thought, 
was  not  the  conversion  of  a  physical  force ;  but 
the  idea  in  the  mind  probably  increased  the  circu- 
lation of  the  brain,  and  with  this  its  animal  heat, 
and  hence  the  needle  moved.  Dr.  Barker  is  en- 
tirely wrong  in  his  interpretation  of  the  fact,  when 
he  says,  "The  heat  evolved  during  the  reception 
of  an  idea  is  energy  which  has  escaped  conversion 

*  "The  Correlation  of  Vital  and  Physical  Forces,"  by  Pro- 
fessor Geo.  F.  Barker,  M.D.,  Yale  College. 


214  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

into  thought."  In  the  actual  process,  there  has  been 
a  thought  in  the  mind,  produced  by  mental  laws, 
prior  to  the  evolution  of  heat,  which  in  fact  follows 
in  consequence  of  the  action  of  thinking  and  emo- 
tion on  the  brain.  Dr.  Barker  tells  us,  farther, 
that  ''  experiments  have  shown  that  ideas  w^hich 
affect  the  emotions  produce  most  heat  in  their  re- 
ception ;  "  "a  few  minutes'  recitation  to  one's  self 
of  emotional  poetry  producing  more  effect  than  sev- 
eral hours  of  deep  thought."  This  is  what  we 
might  anticipate,  according  to  mental  laws,  that 
emotional  thoughts,  such  as  poetical  images,  would 
excite  the  mind  more  than  calm  thoughts,  and 
thereby  use  and  expend  more  physical  force. 
Surely  Dr.  Barker  does  not  mean  that  the  physical 
forces,  that  the  heat  of  the  brain,  could  distinguish 
between  emotional  poetry  and  deep  thought  ?  All 
this  does  not  go  to  prove  that  poetical  images,  such 
as  those  of  Shakspeare,  are  the  conversion  of  phys- 
ical energy.  The  correct  statement  is,  that  the 
emotions  produced  by  mental  action  use  and  waste 
the  brain  energy.  Again,  we  are  told  that  "Dr. 
Lombard's  experiments  have  shown  that  the  amount 
of  heat  developed  by  the  recitation  to  one's  self  of 
emotional  poetry  was,  in  every  case,  less  when  that 
recitation  was  oral."  I  can  readily  believe  this; 
for  when  the  recitation  was  oral,  the  force  which 
w^ould  have  affected  the  needle  was  used  in  con- 
nection with  the  muscular  contraction  necessary  to 
articulation.  Thus,  too,  we  can  explain  the  well- 
known  fact  that,  when  emotion  is  allowed  its  natural 


MIND  NOT  A    CORRELATED   FORCE.        215 

outlet  and  expression  in  bodily  action,  it  is  moder- 
ated. Not  that  the  emotion  is  converted  into  mus- 
cular energy,  but  that  the  physical  energy  in  the 
brain  becoming  less,  the  emotion  is  restrained,  and 
lassitude  follows.  I  do  not  require,  then,  to  dispute 
any  of  Dr.  Barker's  statements  as  to  facts.  I  sim- 
ply dispute  his  interpretation  of  the  facts,  especially 
his  rash  inference  in  the  assertion  that  thoughts 
and  emotions  are  merely  the  conversion  of  physical 
energy ;  of  which  there  is  not  a  particle  of  evi- 
dence. The  change  in  the  state  of  the  brain  does 
not  produce  the  thought,  —  say  the  thought  of  duty 
or  the  thought  of  danger,  —  but  follows  it.  The 
ideas  —  whether  the  being  startled  by  a  sound,  or 
the  calm  meditation  of  a  philosopher  or  mathemati- 
cian, or  the  emotional  image  of  the  poet,  or  the  same 
thoughts  recited  alone  or  to  others  —  all  arise  ac- 
cording to  mental  laws,  which  can  be  very  definitely 
expressed  ;  and  the  liberated  heat  and  electricity  are 
the  accompaniment  of  the  action  of  thought  upon 
the  brain. 

When  physical  force  disappears  in  one  form,  we 
can  find  it  in  another.  When  it  vanishes  as  heat, 
we  may  detect  it  in  the  mechanical  power  of  the 
steam-engine.  We  know,  too,  where  the  power  in 
plants  and  animals  goes.  When  they  die,  it  de- 
scends into  the  earth  to  increase  the  organic  sub- 
stance in  the  soil.  But,  surely,  in  mind  we  must 
have,  if  it  be  a  physical  force,  a  higher  concentra- 
tion of  power  than  in  any  of  these.  But  where  has 
mind-force   gone  on  the  dissolution   of  the  body  ? 


2l6  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

Can  the  man  of  science  detect  it  in  air  or  earth  ? 
Can  he  weigh  it  or  turn  it  to  any  use,  as  he  can 
turn  mechanical  power  or  decaying  vegetable  and 
animal  matter  ?  It  is  said  that  there  is  as  much 
electricity  in  a  rain-drop  as  might  produce,  when 
emitted,  a  thunder  charge.  How^  much  larger 
must  have  been  the  force  in  the  brain  of  Shak- 
speare  !  But,  when  Shakspeare  died,  was  there 
any  evidence  of  the  conversion  of  that  force  into 
any  correlated  force,  chemical,  mechanical,  or 
vital  ? 

Altogether,  the  special  operations  of  the  mind, — 
the  recognition  of  an  event  as  past  by  the  memory, 
the  remembrance  of  a  mother  long  since  ascended 
into  glor}^  the  tracing  of  an  effect  through  a  long 
process  to  a  remote  cause,  the  discovery  of  a  new 
planet  by  mathematical  ratiocination  before  the 
telescope  had  alighted  upon  it,  the  brilliant  fancies 
and  wdde  imaginings  of  the  poet,  the  fondness  of  a 
mother  for  her  son,  the  refusal  to  tell  a  lie  when 
strongly  tempted,  the  resolution  of  the  sailor  to  cast 
himself  into  the  sea  to  preserve  the  life  of  a  fellow- 
creature  at  the  risk  of  his  own,  the  abhorrence  of 
sin  on  the  part  of  a  sanctified  mind,  the  idea  of  God 
and  of  holiness,  the  constant  aim  to  reach  the  purity 
of  heaven, — these,  considered  simply  as  phenomena, 
belong  to  an  entirely  different  order  from  heat,  or 
mechanical  power,  or  an  electric  current,  or  chem- 
ical affinity  :  we  feel  that  there  is  an  incongruity  in 
the  very  proposal  to  weigh  or  measure  them,  and 
there  is  no  proof  that  they  can  be  converted  into 


RELATION   OF  MIND  AND  BODY.  21 7 

a  physical  force,  or  that  a  physical  force   can  be 
converted  into  them. 

The  following  is  a  hypothesis  which  seems  to 
combine  a  number  of  the  facts  established  by  recent 
science.  Mind  does  not  seem  to  me  to  be  connected 
with  rude  matter,  with  the  molecules  of  matter ;  but 
with  the  forces  in  matter,  with  the  correlated  forces. 
There  is  need  of  a  concurrence  of  force  in  the  brain 
in  order  to  mental  action.  This  is  supplied  by  the 
alimentary  and  digestive  organs,  which  may  send  it 
to  the  brain  in  the  form  of  blood.  They  get  it  in 
the  shape  of  food  from  vegetables  or  animals,  which 
again  get  it,  as  every  man  of  science  knows,  from 
the  sun.  The  power  which  radiates  from  the  sun 
enters  the  plant,  which  is  eaten  by  the  ox,  which  is 
eaten  by  us ;  and  the  organs  of  the  body  send  it  on 
to  the  brain,  where  it  is  laid  up  like  water  in  a 
reservoir.  One  main  function  of  the  brain,  espe- 
cially of  the  gray  matter,  is  to  receive  and  distrib- 
ute it.  The  brain  is  provided  for  this  purpose  ;  is 
partly  formed,  I  believe,  by  this  very  force  accu- 
mulating there  from  day  to  day  and  year  to  year. 
Here,  then,  we  have  force  of  some  kind,  and  a 
brain  to  hold  it,  to  direct  it,  and  enable  the  mind 
to  use  it.  But  all  this  is  not  thinking,  is  not  know- 
ing or  feeling  or  willing ;  in  all  this  there  is  no 
discernment,  no  hope  or  fear  or  desire,  or  appre- 
ciation of  the  beautiful,  or  of  good  and  evil.  A 
current  of  nerve  force  running  throuofh  the  cortical 
cells  of  the  brain  is  one  thing,  the  thought  of 
Mayer  in  arguing   out   the   doctrine   of  the    corre- 

10 


2l8  NATURAL    THEOLOGY. 

lation  of  the  physical  forces  is  an  entirely  different 
thing. 

I  am  inclined  to  admit  that  God  has  so  consti- 
tuted our  present  compound  nature,  that,  without 
physical  force  distributed  in  the  brain,  the  mind 
will  not  work,  — just  as  a  water-mill  will  not  work 
if  it  has  no  water.  And  when  the  mind  works,  it 
uses  and  changes  this  power,  which  takes  a  new 
form.  It  is  not  thereby  either  increased  or  dimin- 
ished :  it  merely  gets  a  new  distribution  ;  runs  down, 
in  fact,  to  the  lower  parts  of  the  frame,  and  goes 
out  in  dregs,  and  is  no  longer  available  to  the  mind, 
w^hich  will  act  healthily  only  so  far  as  it  has  a  sup- 
ply of  this  physical  force.  When  this  force  is  ex- 
hausted, the  mind  feels  helpless  for  the  time  —  the 
mill  stops.  If,  by  a  disturbance  in  the  brain,  the 
force  is  improperly  directed,  there  may  be  that  most 
melancholy  of  all  sights,  a  derangement  in  the 
mental  operations.  On  the  needful  force  being  sup- 
plied, the  mind  is  ready  to  work,  and  in  doing  so 
obeys  its  ow^n  laws  —  the  mill  obeys  the  laws  of  its 
own  machinery  :  the  mind  thinks  according  to  logi- 
cal laws,  feels  according  to  the  laws  of  feeling,  ap- 
preciates beauty  according  to  the  laws  of  aesthetics. 
If  the  force  is  supplied  in  proper  measure,  and  in 
the  proper  channels,  the  mind  acts  freely  and 
healthily.  If  not  supplied  in  due  order,  the  mind 
is  arrested,  disturbed,  agitated,  and  its  proper  action 
interfered  with  ;  and  gloomy  thoughts  and  perverted 
feelings  may  arise.  But  all  this,  while  the  physical 
force  is   one  thing,  and  mental  action   is   another 


MIND   IS  IMPERISHABLE. 


219 


thing, — just  as  the  mill  machinery  is  one  thing, 
and  the  water  which  it  needs  another  thing.  And 
tliough  the  one  were  to  cease,  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  other  must  also  cease.  The  v/ater  would  flow 
on  whether  there  be  a  mill  or  no.  The  mill  might 
go  by  some  other  power,  —  say  steam,  —  supplying 
the  needful  conditions.  As  man  is  at  present  consti- 
tuted, the  mind  needs  the  physical  force  and  the 
brain-case  to  hold  that  force  and  direct  it ;  but  this 
does  not  show  that  in  another  state  of  things  the 
mind  might  not  without  the  body,  —  and  on  other 
conditions  being  supplied,  —  think  and  feel  and  act 
as  it  did  before.  When  a  blacksmith's  stroke  is 
stayed  by  striking  on  the  anvil,  we  know  where  the 
power  has  gone  :  it  has  gone  into  the  molecular 
motion  or  heat  of  the  body  struck.  When  the  body 
of  the  animal  dies,  we  know  where  the  power  has 
gone  :  it  has  gone  into  the  soil  to  enrich  it.  When 
Newton  died,  where  did  the  intellectual  force  go?  I 
know  where  :  it  went  not  down  into  the  earth  with  the 
body,  but  up  to  God  in  heaven.  When  the  Chris- 
tian dies,  where  has  his  love  gone?  Not  into  the 
grave  for  worms  to  feed  on  it,  but  up  to  the  bosom 
of  the  Saviour  from  which  it  has  flowed.  Yes  :  it  is 
a  universal  law  of  nature  and  of  grace  that  nothing 
dies,  though  every  thing  changes.  "The  dust  shall 
return  to  the  earth  as  it  was,  and  the  spirit  shall 
return  unto  God  who  gave  it." 


VIII. 

Our    Lord's    Life   a    Reality   and   not   a    Romance.  — 
Criticism  of  Renan's  Life  of  Jesus. 

-npHE  points  which  I  have  been  discussing  in  the 
-^  previous  lectures  have  a  bearing  both  upon 
Natural  and  Revealed  Religion.  If  we  cannot 
know  any  thing  except  what  passes  under  our  sen- 
tient experience,  we  have  no  evidence  of  those 
great  verities  to  which  faith  looks ;  and  if  the  soul 
of  man  be  material,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  we 
can  rise  to  the  conception  of  an  immaterial  God,  or 
be  justified  in  holding  by  the  immortality  of  the  soul. 
And  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  Scriptures 
do  not  set  about  proving  that  there  is  a  God  :  they 
assume  that  he  exists,  and  claim  to  be  a  revelation 
of  his  will.  There  have  been  persons  who  sought 
to  undermine  our  belief  in  natural  religion,  in  order 
to  shut  us  up  into  revealed  religion,  —  a  very  peril- 
ous undertaking,  inasmuch  as  in  pulling  down  the 
platform  on  which  their  opponents  are  placed,  they 
pull  down  that  on  w^hich  they  themselves  stand.  I 
can  join  heartily  with  all  those  who  would  establish 
in  a  loirical  manner  the  £i"reat  truths  of  Natural 
Theology ;   and   I   confidently   expect  help   at  this 


REVEALED  RELIGION.  121 

point  from  the  best  Unitarians  and  Rationalists  of 
America.  It  must  now  be  clear  to  them  that,  if 
these  foundations  are  destroyed  by  the  rising  Posi- 
tive or  Materialist  schools,  they  have  no  religion 
left :  and  I  am  cherishing  the  hope  that  they  will 
employ  the  literary  and  philosophical  abilities  which 
God  has  given  them,  in  defending  the  great  truths 
of  the  existence  of  God,  the  immortality  of  the  soul, 
and  the  indelible  distinction  between  good  and  evil ; 
and  in  doing  so,  my  hope  is  that  they  may  be  led 
into  a  higher  religious  position  than  that  which  they 
at  present  occupy.  Standing  on  these  fundamental 
truths,  they  will  feel  that  what  they  know  impels 
them  to  desire  to  know  more.  For  the  question  will 
press  itself  upon  them.  How  do  I  stand  in  relation 
to  that  God  in  whose  existence  I  believe?  to  that 
holy  God  who  hates  sin?  to  that  God  to  whom  I 
must  give  an  account?  That  law  in  the  heart  con- 
demns the  possessor  of  it :  how  am  I  to  be  recon- 
ciled to  the  Lawgiver?  These  questions  carry  us 
beyond  natural  to  revealed  religion. 

With  a  special  object  before  me  in  these  Lec- 
tures,—  that  is,  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  times,  —  I 
am  not  to  enter  on  the  whole  wide  subject  of  the 
Evidences  of  Christianity.  It  is  now  felt  on  all  hands 
that  the  question  turns  round  the  Life,  the  Charac- 
ter, and  the  Works  of  Jesus.  This  is  the  strong- 
hold which  has  often  been  assailed  and  never  been 
taken.  With  it  secured,  we  can  defend  the  whole 
territory,  —  Old  Testament  and  New  Testament,  doc- 
trine, history,  and  morality.     An  ingenious  attempt 


222  APOLOGETICS. 

has   been    made   in   our   day  to   seize   this  citadel ; 
and  this  I  seek  to  meet. 

There  are  two,  and  only  two,  ways  in  which  an 
attack  can  be  made  on  the  reality  of  our  Lord's  life. 
It  may  be  urged,  first,  that  the  gospel  history  is  a 
fable,  in  which  it  is  vain  to  seek  for  any  truth ;  or 
that  it  is  such  a  mixture  of  fact  and  fable,  that  it 
is  impossible  to  distinguish  the  one  from  the  other. 
It  is  after  this  manner  that  Grote  proceeds  in  deal- 
ing with  the  siege  of  Troy.  He  says,  we  have 
no  account  of  the  siege  except  in  books  of  poetry, 
which  do  not  profess  to  be  history,  and  which  were 
composed  ages  after  the  alleged  occurrence ;  and 
so  we  cannot  be  quite  sure  that  there  ever  was  such 
an  event :  or,  on  the  supposition  that  there  may  have 
been  a  basis  of  fact,  we  cannot  separate  the  actual 
from  the  traditional  and  legendary.  There  have 
been  assailants  who  took  this  ground  in  seeking  to 
undermine  our  confidence  in  the  gospel  history.  It 
is  now  acknowledged  that  the  attempt  w^as  a  com- 
plete and  a  miserable  failure.  Our  Lord  lived  not 
in  fabulous,  but  in  historical,  times,  in  which  Grecian 
culture  and  literature  w^ere  w^idely  diffused,  and  in 
which  the  Roman  government  had  introduced  set- 
tled law  and  means  of  communication.  And  these 
four  Gospels  are,  on  the  very  face  of  them,  not 
poems  or  legends  or  myths,  but  historical  narra- 
tives, professedly  by  eye-wdtnesses,  or  persons  who 
received  their  information  from  eye-witnesses.  In 
their  structure  and  spirit  they  are  simple  and  art- 
less, life-like  and  truth-like.     Satisfactory  evidence 


M.   KENAN'S  ADMISSIONS.  223 

can  be  produced  that  they  existed  very  much  as  we 
now  have  them  in  the  age  immediately  succeeding 
the  crucifixion  of  Jesus,  —  three  of  them  in  less  than 
forty,  and  the  other  in  about  sixty,  years  from  that 
event.  If  we  maintain  that  the  life  of  our  Lord  is 
not  an  historical  event,  we  are  landed  in  hopeless 
difficulties  :  in  consistency,  we  shall  have  to  give  up 
all  ancient  history,  deny  that  there  ever  was  such  a 
person  as  Alexander  of  Macedon,  or  that  there  was 
such  an  event  as  the  assassination  of  Julius  Cassar. 
M.  Renan  has  seen  this,  and  has  followed  another 
method.  He  allows  that  the  four  Gospels  are  in 
substance  historical  books,  and  that  Jesus  spoke 
and  acted  very  much  as  he  is  represented  as  doing 
in  these  narratives ;  but  then  he  claims  to  take  so 
much,  and  rejects  the  rest.  He  has  thus  avoided 
some  of  the  difficulties  in  which  infidels  have  in- 
volved themselves,  but  he  is  caught  in  others  quite 
as  formidable.  He  has  drawn  out  from  these  four 
Gospels  a  superficially  connected  and  plausible  biog- 
raphy which  he  chooses  to  call  a  fifth  Gospel ;  but 
in  doing  so  he  has  violated  all  the  laws  of  historical 
investigation,  proceeded  on  caprice  and  prejudice, 
drawn  a  character  inconsistent  with  itself,  and  given 
us  a  history  utterly  incongruous  and  incredible. 

It  is  one  of  the  disadvantages  under  which  we 
labor  in  contending  with  the  sceptic,  that  he  objects 
to  every  weapon  which  we  may  bring  with  us.  It 
is  fortunately  possible  in  the  argument  with  this 
critic  of  our  Lord's  life,  that  we  can  fight  him  with 
his  own  weapons.     M.  Renan  receives  a  large  por- 


224  APOLOGETICS. 

tion  of  the  gospel  history,  but  he  will  not  accept 
the  whole.  Now  I  meet  him  by  showing  that  he 
is  acting  capriciously  in  taking  so  large  a  part  and 
rejecting  the  remainder,  and  that  the  same  histori- 
cal reasons  which  lead  him  to  adopt  so  much  should 
in  consistency  constrain  him  to  go  farther  and  hold 
by  the  rest.  Suppose  some  one  were  to  affirm  that 
Shakspeare  had  written  all  those  plays  which  deal 
with  war  and  stirring  incident,  but  that  he  could 
not  have  conceived  or  depicted  the  reflective  and 
moralizing  Hamlet ;  or  to  maintain  that  while  Milton 
had  composed  the  dignified  and  magnificent  "  Para- 
dise Lost "  he  had  not  written  the  livelier  "  Comus," 
or  the  duller  "Paradise  Regained,"  which,  it  is 
alleged,  must  have  been  produced  by  an  imitator  of 
inferior  genius  :  how  would  you  meet  such  a  pre- 
posterous hypothesis?  You  would  prove  that  we 
have  as  good  historical  proof  of  the  one  work,  as  of 
the  other,  proceeding  from  the  authors  whose  names 
they  bear ;  and  you  might  show,  farther,  that  the 
w^orks  themselves  bear  traces  in  style  and  manner, 
in  thought  and  sentiment,  of  proceeding  from  the 
same  writers.  It  is  in  this  way  that  I  am  to  pro- 
ceed in  reviewing  the  French  critic.  I  am  to  show 
that  when  he  has  gone  so  far,  he  cannot  in  consist- 
ency stop  where  he  does,  but  must  advance  con- 
siderably farther. 

I  am  to  assume  nothing  w^hich  he  does  not  allow 
in  his  candor  or  in  his  ingenuity.  What,  then,  does 
he  admit?  He  allows  that  Matthew  wrote  a  Gospel ; 
that  Matthew  was  an  eye-witness  and  an  ear-witness 


MA  TTHE  W  AND  MARKS  G  OS  PEL  S.  225 

of  what  he  records,  or  had  very  direct  means  of- 
knowing  the  truth  of  it.  He  ct)ncedes  all  this  on 
the  internal  credibility  of  the  narrative,  and  on  the 
authority  of  Papias,  who  wrote  early  in  the  second 
century,  and  of  a  chain  of  succeeding  writers,  who 
quote  or  refer  to  the  Gospel.  He  is  specially  fond 
of  insisting  that  Matthew  preserved  the  Discourses 
of  our  Lord,  —  "  he  deserves,  evidently,  a  confidence 
without  limit  for  the  discourses  ;  "  *  and,  in  particu- 
lar, he  grants  that  the  parables,  as  being  one  narra- 
tive, could  not  be  altered,  and  that  we  have  them  as 
our  Lord  delivered  them.  He  allows  farther  that 
there  was  a  Gospel  by  Mark ;  that  Mark  was  a  dis- 
ciple and  an  eye-witness,  and  to  be  trusted  as  to  the 
facts  w^hich  he  relates ;  that  he  was  a  relative  of 
Peter,  who  may  be  supposed  to  have  given  his  sanc- 
tion to  Mark's  Gospel ;  and  that  Peter  was  originally 
an  illiterate  fisherman,  and  the  impulsive,  impetuous, 
open,  and  honest  man  which  he  is  described  as  being 
in  the  Gospels.  He  admits  that  Matthew  and  Mark 
were  not  men  of  genius  or  invention ;  that  neither 
was  capable  of  writing  the  discourses  put  into  the 
mouth  of  our  Lord,  of  imagining  the  wonders  which 
he  is  represented  as  performing,  or  of  conceiving 
the  finer  and  loftier  features  of  his  character.  He 
grants  farther  that  these  two  Gospels  must  have  been 
written  about  the  time  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem ; 
that  is,  between  thirty  and  forty  years  after  our 
Lord's  crucifixion. 

So   far   all   seems   satisfactory   to    the    Christian. 

*  Introd.  p.  xxxvii  (in  13th  ed.  p.  Ixxxi.). 
10* 


226  APOLOGETICS. 

•But,  to  enable  our  critic  to  dispense  with  any  pas- 
sages that  displease  him,  he  alleges  that  the  two 
Gospels  underwent  a  change.  He  thinks  that  when 
a  person  happened  to  have  either  of  the  Gospels,  in 
order  to  have  a  complete  text,  he  would  write  on 
the  margin  passages  from  the  other  Gospel.  It  was 
in  this  way,  he  supposes,  that  tht  two  Gospels  were 
fashioned  into  the  shape  in  which  we  now  have 
them.  The  theory  may  seem  an  ingenious  one  ;  but 
it  is  a  crazy  fabric,  which,  as  it  tumbles  down,  only 
injures  the  man  who  built  it.  For,  by  such  a  proc- 
ess, we  should  have  had,  not  two  Gospels,  but  a 
hundred  or  a  thousand.  The  disciple  at  Jerusalem 
with  a  copy  of  Matthew  would  make  additions  in 
one  way ;  and  the  Christian  at  Antioch  with  a  copy 
of  Mark  w^ould  supplement  in  a  different  way ; 
while  readers  at  Alexandria,  at  Ephesus,  at  Corinth, 
and  at  Rome  would  amend  in  still  different  waj-s  : 
and  thus  we  should  have  had  innumerable  variations 
and  discrepancies  ever  multiplying  and  becoming 
more  exaggerated;  whereas,  as  is  admitted  by  all, 
we  have,  from  a  very  old  date,  certainty  from  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century  —  I  believe  earlier 
—  these  two  Gospels  in  their  present  form,  and  soon 
after  we  have  them  fixed  for  ever,  by  their  being 
translated  into  other  tongues. 

M.  Renan  does  not  look  with  so  favorable  an  eye 
on  Luke's  Gospel.  He  evidently  does  not  like  the 
account  given  in  the  first  two  chapters  of  our  Lord's 
supernatural  descent.  But  he  makes  important  ad- 
missions as  to  this  Gospel.     It  is  allowed  that  it  was 


LUKE'S    GOSPEL.  227 

written  by  Luke,  and  that  Luke  also  wrote  the  Book 
of  Acts ;  that  Luke  was  a  disciple  of  our  Lord,  and 
had  means  of  knowing  about  his  sayings  and  acts ; 
that,  as  he  claims,  he  "had  perfect  understanding 
of  all  things  from  the  first,"  and  got  information 
"from  them  that  were  eye-witnesses  and  ministers 
of  the  Word ; "  that  he  was  the  companion  of  Paul, 
and  must  have  had  the  countenance  of  that  Apostle 
to  his  Gospel.  He  will  not  allow  that  Luke  pub- 
lished his  Gospel  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ; 
for  this  would  imply  that  our  Lord  gave  a  most 
minute  prediction  of  that  event  (chap,  xxi.)  :  but  he 
is  sure  it  must  have  been  given  to  the  world  soon 
after  ;  that  is,  within  forty  years  of  our  Lord's  death. 
He  qualifies  all  this  by  alleging  that  Luke  admitted 
legends  and  adopted  traditions.  Here  again  our 
critic  involves  himself  in  perplexities  from  which 
there  is  no  honest  outlet.  For  in  these  forty  years 
there  was  not  time  for  the  gathering  of  traditions  or 
the  formation  of  myths.  We  have  unfounded  tradi- 
tions and  legends  of  occurrences  which  happened 
centuries  ago,  but  not  of  the  lives  of  John  Quincy 
Adams,  Henry  Clay,  and  General  Jackson.  At 
the  time  when  Luke  wrote,  a  large  body  of  eye- 
witnesses and  of  actors  in  the  scenes,  Galilean  and 
Jewish,  such  as  apostles,  disciples,  priests,  scribes, 
and  rulers,  — friendly  and  unfriendly,  —  must  have 
been  alive,  and  many  of  them  ready  to  expose  any 
erroneous  statement  put  forth  by  the  friend  of  so 
well  known  an  apostle  as  Paul.  If  it  be  alleged  that 
additions   may   have  been   made  by   others  to  this 


228  APOLOGETICS. 

Gospel,  we  are  involved  in  the  same  difficulties  as 
we  have  shown  Renan  is  in  regard  to  the  first  two 
Gospels;  that  is,  instead  of  one  settled  Gospel,  we 
should  have  a  hundred  Gospels  according  to  Luke, 
each  differing  from  the  others  according  to  the  kind 
of  legends  adopted. 

M.  Renan  does  not  know  very  well  what  to  make 
of  John's  Gospel.  He  is  sure  it  must  have  been  the 
same  person  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  three 
epistles  that  bear  the  name  of  John  :  the  style  is 
sufficient  to  prove  this.  He  reckons  it  quite  estab- 
lished by  historical  evidence  that  this  Gospel  was 
published  before  the  end  of  the  century  ;  that  is, 
less  than  seventy  years  after  our  Lord's  ascen- 
sion. He  is  certain  that  the  author  must  have  been 
John,  or  an  immediate  disciple  of  John,  and  thinks 
it  highly  probable  that  it  must  have  been  written  by 
John  :  in  fact,  he  thinks,  we  may  consider  John  as 
the  author.  He  allows  that  John  was  an  apostle 
very  intimate  with  our  Lord,  and  constantly  with 
him,  and  that  he  wrote  later  than  the  other  evan- 
gelists, and  with  the  view  of  furnishing  a  connected 
chronological  account  of  our  Lord's  life,  and  of 
reporting  discourses  and  detailing  incidents  w^iich 
had  not  appeared  in  the  other  Gospels.  He  con- 
cedes that  this  John  was  originally  an  illiterate 
fisherman,  son  of  Zebedee  the  fisherman,  on  the 
lake  of  Galilee ;  and  that  he  could  not  have  con- 
ceived or  written  certain  of  the  discourses  in  the 
Gospel,  such  as  that  sublime  prayer  which  Jesus  is 
represented  (chap,   xvii.)  as  putting  up  in   behalf 


JOHN'S    GOSPEL,  229 

of  his  disciples.  But  to  counteract  these  conces- 
sions, he  would  have  it  that  parts  of  chap.  xxi.  are 
an  addition  made  by  one  who  was  nearly  a  contem- 
porary. He  insinuates  that  good  faith  was  not  always 
John's  rule  in  writing  his  Gospel.*  But  observe 
into  what  a  mess  of  difficulties  our  author  has 
plunged  himself  by  these  admissions  and  denials. 
Chap.  xxi.  has  all  the  peculiarities  of  style  which 
have  convinced  Renan  that  the  other  parts  of  the 
Gospel  and  the  Epistles  are  by  the  same  writer. 
That  writer  opens  his  First  Epistle  :  "  That  which 
was  from  the  beginning,  which  we  have  heard, 
which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  which  we  have 
looked  upon  and  our  hands  have  handled  of  the 
Word  of  Life ;  for  the  Life  was  manifested,  and  we 
have  seen  it  and  bear  witness."  M.  Renan  is  evi- 
dently right  when  he  finds  the  same  author  saying 
in  the  same  style  (John  xix.  35),  "And  he  that  saw 
it  bare  record,  and  his  record  is  true,  and  he  know- 
eth  that  he  saith  true  that  ye  might  believe."  But 
surel}^  it  must  be  the  same  who  says  in  the  rejected 
chapter  xxi.  24,  "This  is  the  disciple  which  tes- 
tifieth  of  these  things,  and  wrote  these  things,  and 
we  know  that  his  testimony  is  true."  I  believe  the 
testimony  thus  solemnly  given.  To  refuse  this  is 
to  make  a  liar  and  a  hypocrite  of  the  beloved  dis- 
ciple of  our  Lord,  the  apostle  who  has  recorded  the 
most  heavenly  and  loving  of  his  discourses,  and 
who,  according  to  history,  lived  a  long  and  consist- 
ent life,  bearing  persecution  and  exile,  because  of 

*  Page  159. 


230  APOLOGETICS. 

his  belief  in  what  he  has  attested,  and  ever  with  the 
words  of  purity  and  truth  upon  his  lips. 

Such  was  the  view  taken  of  John's  Gospel  in  the 
first  twelve  editions  of  his  work.  In  the  thirteenth 
he  modifies  his  previous  opinions.  He  is  now 
inclined  to  think  that  the  Apostle  John  is  not  the 
author  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  But  he  argues  still 
that  it  has  a  real  connection  with  the  Apostle  John, 
and  that  it  was  written  towards  the  end  of  the  first 
century.  He  insists  that  this  Gospel  possesses  at 
bottom  a  value  parallel  to  that  of  the  Synoptics, 
and  in  fact  superior  to  them  at  times.*  But  by 
these  changes  he  has  not  improved  his  position. 
He  acknowledges  that  the  author  of  tlie  fourth 
Gospel  wMshes  to  pass  for  the  Apostle  John. f  He 
farther  allows  that  it  contains  some  references 
{f'cnseignmcnts)  infinitely  superior  to  those  of  the 
Synoptics,  t  He  appreciates  the  beauty  and  pro- 
priety of  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  closing  with 
the  sublime  prayer,  recorded  from  chap,  xiii.- 
xvii.  ;  and  insists  that  there  must  be  truth  in  these 
circumstantial  and  characteristic  narratives  of  the 
transactions  towards  the  close  of  our  Lord's  life. 
What  then  are  we  to  make  of  these  ?  Were  the 
discourses  and  the  prayer  uttered  by  Jesus  ?  Then 
they  carry  with  them  the  whole  incidents  of  which 
they  formed  a  part,   and  out   of  which   they  arose. 

=^  Pref.  de  la  Treiz.  Ed.,  p.  xii.  In  Lecture  IX.  will  be  found 
some  remarks  on  the  apparent  discrepancies  between  John  and 
the  Sjnoptics;  and  in  Lecture  X.  on  John's  Gospel. 

t  Introd.,  p.  Ixv.  J  App.,  p.  514. 


JOHN'S    GOSPEL.  23 1 

Renan  acknowledges  that  the  parables  in  the 
Synoptics  could  not  have  been  composed  by  the 
disciples  who  scarcely  understood  them,  who  were 
not  capable  of  inventing  them,  and  could  not  have 
altered  them  without  entirely  destroying  their  unity. 
And  it  will  at  once  be  admitted  that  they  were  quite 
as  incapable  of  fashioning  the  discourses  and  the 
prayer  of  our  Lord  on  the  night  he  was  betrayed. 
Nor  can  it  be  reasonably  maintained  that,  with  a 
basis  of  fact,  they  may  have  had  additions  made  to 
them  by  legendary  traditions,  for  in  that  case  they 
would  have  lost  all  consistency.  And  so  M.  Renan 
alleges  that  the  fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  some 
member  of  the  schools  of  Asia  which  attached  them- 
selves to  John.  But  to  this  I  reply,  first,  that  no 
mystic  of  Asia  Minor,  or  of  any  other  country,  ever 
produced  any  thing  worthy  of  being  compared  with 
these  chapters.  And,  secondly,  this  is  to  suppose 
that  there  were  two  persons  in  that  century,  one 
of  whom  could  deliver  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
and  the  other  the  addresses  and  the  petition  for  the 
church  —  so  radiant  with  heavenly  light  —  recorded 
in  the  close  of  John's  Gospel.  It  is  to  suppose, 
farther,  -that  these  breathings  of  the  heart  were 
composed  by  one  guilty  all  the  while  of  the  deceit 
implied  in  vv^ishing  to  pass  himself  off  as  the  Apostle 
John.  M.  Renan  evidently  felt  himself  in  diffi- 
culties in  his  old  position,  but  in  shifting  his  ground 
he  has  only  got  into  new  perplexities. 

It  is  out  of  these  four  Gospels  that  the  critic  com- 
poses what  he  calls  a  Fifth  Gospel.     I  have  occu- 


232  APOLOGETICS. 

pied  myself  many  laborious  hours  in  ascertaining 
how  much  of  the  four  Gospels  is  acknowledged  in 
the  fifth.  I  have  marked  by  pencil  in  a  copy  of  the 
New  Testament  the  passages  employed  in  the  con- 
struction of  the  "  Life  of  Jesus,"  and  which  are 
sanctioned  by  quotation  or  by  reference  at  the  foot 
of  the  page,  and  have  thus  made  out  the  Gospel 
history  acknowledged  by  this  unbeliever.  The 
portion  of  my  Testament  occupied  by  the  Gospels 
is  quite  black  with  the  strokes  I  have  drawn. 
There  is  not  a  single  chapter  of  the  four  evan- 
gelists in  which  we  have  not  more  or  less  acknowl- 
edged. The  author  has  accepted  whole  chapters 
as  written  by  Matthew  or  Mark  or  Luke  or  John, 
and  as  containing  the  real  discourses  of  Jesus,  or 
narrating  the  deeds  performed  by  him.  I  find  that 
there  are  about  971  verses  in  Matthew's  Gospel, 
and  Renan  refers  to  no  fewer  than  791  of  these  as 
giving  an  accurate  account  of  the  sayings  or  doings 
of  our  Lord  ;  and  he  quotes  other  73  as  being  in 
the  Gospel  by  Matthew,  but  not  allowed  by  him  to 
state  the  facts  correctly.  In  Mark's  Gospel  there 
are  about  678  verses  ;  and  our  author  uses  384  to 
draw  up  his  own  account  of  our  Lord's  life  ;  and 
ascribes  other  82  to  Mark,  who,  however,  in  these 
does  not  please  the  critic.  Of  the  1151  verses  in 
Luke,  606  are  employed  for  his  own  history  by 
Renan,  and  136  more  are  attributed  to  Luke  with- 
out the  statements  being  sanctioned.  I  have  not 
summed  up  John's  Gospel  so  carefully  because 
he    speaks    so    indecisively    about    it ;    but    a   like 


ADMISSIONS  AS   TO  OUR  LORD'S  LIFE.    233 

calculation    would    give   us   very   much    the    same 
result. 

And  here  it  is  of  the  utmost  moment  to  have  it 
settled  what  the  critic  admits  to  be  true  in  our 
Lord's  life.  He  allows  that  Jesus  was  the  son 
of  Mary,  who  was  married  to  Joseph  the  carpenter; 
that  he  had  brothers  and  sisters,  and  was  the  oldest 
of  the  family  ;  that  he  was  brought  up  at  Nazareth  ; 
that  he  went  up  to  Jerusalem  at  the  age  of  twelve 
and  conversed  with  the  doctors ;  that  he  could  read, 
but  did  not  know  any  foreign  literature;  that  he 
preached  at  Nazareth,  and  was  in  danger  of  being 
thrown  over  the  brow  of  a  hill  (which  M.  Renan 
can  point  out) ,  and  was  driven  out  of  Nazareth ; 
that  he  had  transactions  in  Cana  of  Galilee,  and 
went  to  Capernaum  on  the  lake ;  that  he  was 
much  in  the  houses  of  Zebedee  and  Peter ;  that  he 
gathered  round  him  a  body  of  disciples,  and  that 
the  twelve  named  in  the  Gospels  were  his  apostles ; 
that  he  visited  in  his  labors  of  love  the  cities  and 
villages  lying  round  the  north-west  of  the  lake ; 
that  he  was  beheved  to  cure  diseases  and  work 
miracles,  and  allowed  the  people  to  think  that  he 
did  so ;  that  he  delivered  discourses  from  a  ship  on 
the  lake  and  from  a  mountain  in  the  neighborhood ; 
that  these  discourses,  and  especially  his  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  and  his  parables,  have  been  handed 
down  to  us  as  he  delivered  them  ;  that  he  was  a 
relative  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  had  intercourse 
with  him,  and  was  much  influenced  by  him, 
receiving  messages  from  him  and  sending  me>sages 


234  APOLOGETICS. 

to  him,  and  that  John  was  a  genuine  though  a 
stern  man  ;  that  he  took  occasional  excursions  into 
other  regions,  such  as  the  coasts  of  Tyre  and 
Sidon,  and  to  Cesarea  Phihppi  and  the  Per^a, 
and  Jericho  and  Ephraim ;  and  that  he  went  up 
regularly  to  Jerusalem  at  the  religious  feasts,  and 
there  delivered  discourses  and  purified  the  Temple, 
and  was  supposed  to  do  wonderful  works,  —  all  this 
as  detailed  in  the  four  Gospels.  In  particular 
Renan  gives  a  full  account  of  our  Lord's  last  visit 
to  Jerusalem  and  of  his  death.  He  tells  us  that 
Jesus  was  intimate  with  Martha  and  Mary  and  the 
family  at  Bethany,  that  he  often  spent  the  night 
there,  that  he  brought  Lazarus  out  of  the  tomb 
there,  and  that  ointment  was  poured  on  his  body 
there  in  anticipation  of  his  burial ;  that  he  went 
into  Jerusalem  during  the  day,  and  M.  Renan  can 
point  out  his  favorite  resorts  and  places  of  prome- 
nade ;  that  at  the  passover  he  ate  the  last  supper 
with  his  disciples ;  that  the  priests  and  rulers 
plotted  against  him,  and  that  Judas  betrayed  him; 
that  he  often  went  into  the  garden  of  Gethsemane, 
and  that  the  officers  seized  him  there ;  that  he 
was  brought  before  Caiaphas  the  high  priest,  and 
Annas,  who  (it  is  acknowledged  by  Renan  in 
striking  consonance  with  the  Gospel  narrative) 
ruled  the  high  priest ;  that  his  trial,  as  reported  by 
the  evangelists,  is  in  remarkable  accordance  both 
with  the  Roman  law  and  with  the  Jewish  customs 
as  given  in  the  Jewish  Talmud ;  that  the  disciples 
fled,  that  Peter  stood  afar  off  and  denied  him,  and 


ADMISSIONS  AS  TO  0,UR  LORD'S  LIFE.    235 

that  John  and  the  women  went  to  the  foot  of  the 
cross  ;  that  Pilate  was  unwilling  to  condemn  him 
and  proposed  to  let  him  go,  but  yielded  to  the 
clamors  of  the  Jews,  who  insisted  that  Barabbas 
should  be  released  instead ;  that  he  was  scourged 
and  buffeted,  and  led  to  crucifixion  through  the 
streets  of  Jerusalem  ;  that,  being  exhausted,  they 
laid  his  cross  on  a  3'Oung  man  from  the  country  ; 
that  he  was  crucified  between  two  thieves,  and  tha.t, 
after  being  some  hours  upon  the  cross,  there  was  a 
bursting  of  a  vessel  of  the  heart ;  that  his  side  was 
pierced,  and  that  a  fluid  substance  came  out  of  it; 
that  Joseph  of  Arimathea  begged  the  body,  and 
was  joined  by  Nicodemus  in  preparing  it  for  the 
sepulture ;  that  Pilate,  after  exacting  precautions 
from  the  centurion,  allowed  this  ;  that  he  was  buried 
in  the  tomb,  and  a  great  stone  rolled  upon  it,  and  a 
guard  set  to  watch  it.  Here  Renan  closed  his  Life, 
and  promised  to  take  up  the  resurrection  in  a  future 
volume.  It  is  a  suitable  close.  The  Fifth  Gospel 
gives  us  a  death,  but  gives  no  resurrection.  In 
the  Christian  Church,  as  at  the  creation  of  the 
world,  the  evening  and  the  morning  constitute  the 
day  :  in  this  new  religion,  which  is  to  supersede 
the  Christian,  the  night  cometh,  but  there  is  no 
morning. 

We  do  wonder,  when  all  this  is  allowed,  that  the 
other  parts  of  the  gospel  narrative  should  be  denied. 
But  Renan  cannot  admit  that  our  Lord  possessed 
supernatural  power  ;  and  so  he  is  obliged  to  devise 
a  theory  to  account  for  our  Lord's  character,  influ- 


236  APOLOGETICS. 

ence,  and  alleged  wonderful  deeds,  without  allowing 
him  to  be  a  divine  messenger  or  teacher.  He  finds 
three  periods  in  our  Lord's  life.  In  the  first  period, 
he  sets  out  as  a  moralist  and  gentle  reformer  :  he 
begins  to  preach  and  gather  round  him  a  company 
of  disciples,  and  to  travel  from  village  to  village  in 
Galilee.  In  the  second  period,  he  comes  into  closer 
communion  with  the  stern  and  gloomy  Baptist :  he 
imagines  himself,  or  allows  himself  to  be  thought, 
the  son  of  David  and  the  Messiah  of  the  prophets  ; 
and  seeks  to  establish  a  kingdom  of  a  romantic  or 
ideal  character,  in  which  civil  government  and 
private  property  were  to  cease,  and  in  which  the 
rich  were  to  be  degraded  and  the  poor  exalted. 
Failing  in  this,  there  comes  a  thh'd  period,  in  which 
he  becomes  disappointed  and  embittered ;  nay,  is 
tempted  to  use  artifice,  and  is  hurried  on  to  death  in 
a  troubled  manner  and  spirit,  expecting  some  unde- 
fined world-revolution  to  come.  This  is  the  new 
theory  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  stript  of  some  of  the 
paint  with  which  the  artist  has  daubed  it.  It  is  one 
of  the  most  baseless  historical  theories  ever  formed 
by  perverted  ingenuity.  In  order  to  confute  it,  I 
am  to  use  no  other  materials  than  those  which 
the  author  of  it  has  sanctioned.  The  passages 
which  I  quote  (except  when  notice  is  given)  are 
all  employed  by  the  critic  in  constructing  his  theory, 
and  may  therefore  be  legitimately  employed  in  over- 
turnincr  it. 

First  Period.     At   this    stage  Jesus  is  placed 
before  us  in  what  is  meant  to  be  a  very  engaging 


FIRST  PERIOD.  237 

light.  There  never  was  so  lovely  a  person  as  he. 
Of  a  ravishing  form,  of  a  genial  and  loving  spirit, 
he  drew  towards  him  the  hearts  of  all  the  men,  but 
especially  of  all  the  women,  with  whom  he  came 
in  contact.  Somehow  — om-  author  cannot  tell  us 
how  — the  youth  had  risen  to  a  high  morality,  far 
above  that  of  degraded  Galilee  or  bigoted  Judaea. 
He  had  come  to  feel  that  God  was  his  Father,  and 
the  Father  of  all  mankind.  This  was  all  his  the- 
ology ;  he  knew  no  more  :  but  this  idea  penetrated 
and  filled  his  soul.  With  no  sense  of  individuality, 
he  could  not  distinguish  himself  from  God.  In  a 
happy  hour,  — so  our  author  expresses  it,  — he  be- 
gins to  be  a  reformer  and  the  preacher  of  a  new 
morality.  Drawn  by  his  charming  person,  and  the 
evidences  of  his  love,  a  number  of  men  and  women 
gather  round  him.  Putting  himself  at  their  head, 
he  rides  about  the  country.  "He  thus  traverses 
Galilee  in  the  midst  of  a  perpetual  fete.  He  rode 
upon  a  mule,  an  animal  in  the  East  well  adapted 
for  riding,  sure-footed,  and  with  a  dark  eye 
shadowed  with  long  lashes  and  full  of  mildness. 
His  disciples  sometimes  gave  vent  to  their  en- 
thusiasm by  attempting  a  sort  of  rustic  triumph. 
Their  garments  took  the  place  of  drapery  :  they 
cast  them  upon  the  mule  that  bore  him  ;  they 
spread  them  upon  the  ground  where  he  had  to 
tread.  Wherever  he  dismounted,  his  arrival  was 
held  to  be  a  joy  and  a  blessing  to  that  house.  He 
stayed  chiefly  in  the  villages  and  at  the  large  farms, 
where  he   met  with    an    eager    welcome " !  !     The 


238  APOLOGETICS. 

picture  is  a  veiy  pretty  one,  and  resembles  the  pil- 
grimages which  I  have  seen  in  Austria  of  men 
and  women  to  favorite  shrines.  Our  author  at  this 
place  gives  a  very  enchanting  picture  of  the  scenery 
of  Galilee,  of  its  lake  and  mountains,  its  trees  and 
shrubs,  its  grass  and  lilies,  which  he  supposes  the 
carpenter's  son  and  his  attendant  fishermen  to  ad- 
mire, in  much  the  same  way  as  the  boy  poets 
of  this  century,  who  have  caught  the  spirit  of 
Rousseau,  Scott,  and  Chateaubriand,  rave  about 
natural  scenery.  Full  of  ideal  dreams  and  pastoral 
visions,  our  Lord  is  represented  as  delivering  his 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  acknowledged  to  be  perfect, 
and  also  the  most  beautiful  and  instructive  of  his 
parables. 

This  is  Renan's  picture  of  the  First  Period.  As 
to  some  points  in  this  description,  it  is  clear  that 
they  are  pure  romance.  It  is  instructive  to  find 
that  no  evangelist,  no  early  Christian,  says  a  word 
about  the  beauty  of  Christ's  person.  I  rather  think 
that  Renan  here  draws  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
painters.  As  to  his  riding  on  a  mule,  we  read  of 
his  once  riding  into  Jerusalem  on  an  ass,  as  a  sym- 
bol of  his  being  a  king,  but  a  lowly  king  ;  but  at 
all  other  times  he  walked  it  on  weary  foot  over 
burning  plain  and  rugged  mountain.  As  to  his 
admiration  of  natural  scenery,  it  is  obvious  that  he 
did  love  and  appreciate  his  Father's  workmanship, 
that  grass  and  these  lilies,  and  the  fowls  of  the 
air,  but  it  was  with  a  far  loftier  feeling  than  the 
Frenchman  gives  him  credit  for  ;   and  there  is  really 


OUR   LORDS  MORALITY.  239 

no  reason  to  believe  that  Peter  and  Andrew,  Philip 
and  Thomas,  did  ever  break  forth  into  ecstasies 
about  flowers,  like  boarding-school  girls  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  or  were  any  thing  more  than 
plain,  earnest  fishermen,  striving  to  earn  an  honest 
livelihood  on  their  lake,  and  seeking  withal  to 
know  what  is  true  about  God  and  right  in  duty. 
And  then  that  sermon,  acknowledged  to  be  so  per- 
fect that  none  but  Jesus  could  have  uttered  it,  how 
did  it  come  that  a  Galilean  peasant  could  utter  it? 
Whence  that  morality,  pure,  it  is  acknowledged,  be- 
yond all  displayed  to  us  before  or  since?  I  believe 
that  he  who  expounded  it  must  have  been  taught  of 
God. 

That  morality  is  not  only  pure  and  ethereal,  as 
Renan  allows  :  it  is  profound,  penetrating,  and  soul- 
searching,  in  a  way  which  our  smart  critic  cannot 
estimate.  It  is  certainly  very  different  from  the 
light,  airy  sentiment  which  is  painted  and  recom- 
mended in  our  modern  romances,  French  and  Brit- 
ish. It  is  different  in  its  whole  spirit  from  the 
narrow,  self-righteous  ceremonial  of  the  Pharisees, 
who  busied  themselves  with  laying  down  regu- 
lations as  to  the  tithing  of  mint,  anise,  and  cum- 
min, and  as  to  the  washing  of  pots  and  vessels.  It 
is  equally  removed  by  its  spirit  of  love  and  self- 
sacrifice  above  that  of  the  proud  old  pagan  philos- 
ophers of  Greece  or  Rome,  or  that  of  the  modern, 
self-sufficient  rationalist.  It  presupposes  that  man 
is  a  sinner ;  it  sets  before  him  a  high  ideal  of  purity 
and  love,  and  points  out  a  way  of  reaching  it  by 


240  APOLOGETICS. 

grace ;  and  it  recommends  the  graces  of  faith  in 
God,  repentance,  humility,  and  charity. 

It  can  be  farther  shown,  that,  while  he  was  from 
the  beginning  a  moralist,  he  was  from  the  first  more 
than  a  moralist.  It  was  not  in  the  progress  of 
events  that  the  idea  occurred  to  him  of  setting  up  a 
kingdom  :  he  intended  all  along  to  do  so.  It  was 
not  as  he  met  with  keen  opposition  at  Jerusalem 
that  he  contemplated  persecution :  he  foresaw  it 
from  the  commencement  of  his  public  ministry. 
All  this  can  be  established  by  passages  sanctioned 
by  Renan  as  belonging  to  the  earliest  part  of  our 
Lord's  ministry. 

In  proving  this,  I  will  not  insist  on  the  intimation 
of  Jesus,  contemplating  a  great  work,  at  the  age  of 
twelve,  "I  must  be  about  my  Father's  business" 
(Luke  ii.  49)  ;  for  the  critic,  while  he  quotes  the 
passage,  is  not  sure  about  our  Lord's  younger  years. 
Neither  will  I  dwell  on  his  being  consecrated  to  his 
work  by  baptism,  as  our  author  is  not  very  willing  to 
give  his  adhesion  to  all  that  is  said  about  John  bap- 
tizing Jesus  ;  for  he  sees  it  implies  the  supernatural, 
—  the  heavens  opened,  the  dove  descending,  and  the 
Father  approving.  But  I  ask.  What  meaneth  the 
temptation  which  preceded  our  Lord's  preaching  and 
ministry  ?  Recorded  by  the  first  three  evangelists  ; 
reported  by  Mark,  who  is  said  to  be  so  accurate  as 
to  facts,  —  Renan  acknowledges  that  there  must  be 
reality  in  it.  And  mark  that  it  comes  in,  not  at  the 
close  of  his  ministry,  when  his  spirit  was  supposed 
to  be  chafed  by  opposition  ;  but  at  the  commence- 


OUR   LORD'S  EARLT  PREACHING. 


241 


ment,  showing  that  there  was  ah^eady  a  cloud  over 
his  spirit,  and  denoting  that  thunders  would  speedily 
burst.  Then,  let  us  listen  to  our  Lord's  first  sermon. 
It  is  not  of  that  light,  romantic  character  which  we 
might  expect  from  Renan's  theory.  The  subject  of 
it  is  given,  Mat.  iv.  17,  "Repent:  for  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  is  at  hand,"  in  which  two  great  truths  are 
brought  out :  one,  that  there  was  a  kingdom  at  hand  ; 
and  the  other,  that  men  were  to  enter  it  by  repent- 
ance. The  account  is  fuller  in  Mark  i.  14,  15  : 
"Jesus  came  into  Galilee  preaching  the  gospel  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  saying  the  time  is  fulfilled, 
and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand  ;  repent  ye  and 
believe  the  gospel ;"  where  it  should  be  marked  that 
our  Lord  connects  the  kingdom  he  w^as  to  set  up  with 
the  predictions  of  the  prophets,  the  fulfilment  of 
which  is  said  to  be  at  hand  ;  that  the  coming  king- 
dom is  twice  mentioned ;  that  the  gospel  is  said  to 
be  about  that  kingdom  ;  and  that  repentance  is  the 
proper  preparation  for  it. 

Let  us  turn  now  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  so 
much  lauded.  The  first  beatitude  is  one  suited  to 
sinners  (Mat.  v.  3):  "Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit." 
The  second  implies  that  men  are  sinners,  v.  4 : 
"Blessed  are  they  that  mourn."  There  is  a  distinct 
apprehension  of  persecution  coming,  and  an  admoni- 
tion to  prepare  for  it,  v.  11,  12:  "Blessed  are  ye, 
when  men  shall  revile  you  and  persecute  you,  and 
shall  say  all  manner  of  evil  against  you  falseh^ 
Rejoice,  and  be  exceeding  glad  ;  for  great  is  your 
reward  in  heaven  :  for  so  persecuted  they  the  proph- 


242 


APOLOGETICS. 


ets  that  were  before  you."  A  kingdom  is  everywhere 
kept  before  our  view,  and  the  disciples  were  taught 
to  pray,  "Thy  kingdom  come."  Those  who  use  the 
Lord's  prayer  are  assumed  to  be  sinners,  to  be  weak 
and  liable  to  temptation,  and  exposed  to  the  assaults 
of  the  Evil  One,  vi.  12  :  "And  forgive  us  our  debts, 
as  w^e  forgive  our  debtors  ;  and  lead  us  not  into  temp- 
tation, but  deliver  us  from  the  Evil  One."  The  diffi- 
culties of  the  Christian  course  are  clearly  announced, 
vii.  14:  "Strait  is  the  gate,  and  narrow  is  the  w^ay, 
which  leadeth  to  life,  and  few  there  be  that  find  it.'* 
I  quote  these  utterances  (and  others  to  the  same 
effect  might  be  added) ,  because  it  is  acTcnowdedged 
that  they  were  delivered  in  the  First  Period,  when 
it  is  supposed  that  he  w^as  so  light  and  hopeful,  and 
his  w^hole  prospect  gladdened  w^ith  sunshine.  It 
should  be  frankly  admitted  that  Jesus  developed  his 
plans  gradually,  as  they  had  been  ordained  in  the 
counsels  of  heaven,  and  according  as  men  were  able 
to  bear  them.  But  he  had  in  him  all  along  what  he 
afterwards  became,  just  as  the  tree  is  in  the  seed, 
as  the  oak  is  in  the  acorn.  His  course  was  one 
from  first  to  last,  along  one  road  to  one  goal ;  begin- 
nincr  with  his  baptism  and  temptation,  and  ending 
with  his  crucifixion,  resurrection,  and  ascension. 

Second  Period.  In  this  period,  Jesus  comes  into 
closer  connection  with  John,  is  seized  with  a  revolu- 
tionary ardor,  and  purposes  to  set  up  a  kingdom. 
Though  not  descended  from  David,  he  allows  it  to 
be  thought  that  he  is.  He  never  goes  so  far  as  to 
make  himself  equal  wdth  God  ;  but  he  identifies  him- 


SECOND  PERIOD.  243 

self  with  God,  and  reckons  himself  the  Messiah. 
The  kingdom  which  he  contemplates  is  not  to  be  a 
political  one  established  by  a  rebellion  against  the 
Roman  government.  It  is  an  ideal,  that  is  a  vision- 
ary, one,  with  no  magistrate  and  no  private  property, 
and  is  to  appear  immediately.  In  order  to  bring  it 
in,  he  ordains  apostles  and  sends  them  out  to  preach 
and  proclaim  the  new  reign.  Meanwhile  he  allows 
his  ardent  followers  and  the  superstitious  multitude 
to  imagine  that  he  heals  diseases  by  a  miraculous 
power,  which  he  does  not  possess.  Such  was  his 
aim  and  his  work  during  the  middle  portion  of  his 
ministry,  in  which,  according  to  our  author,  we  have 
his  enthusiasm  kindled  into  a  nobler  flame,  and  his 
contemplated  end  enlarged ;  but  in  which  also  we 
have  the  commencement  of  deflections  from  the  pure 
morality  of  his  early  career,  and  of  that  accommo- 
dation to  circumstances  which  led  to  positive  artifice 
in  the  Third  Period.  If  Jesus  had  died  before  this 
stage  of  his  existence,  he  would  not  have  been  heard 
of  beyond  a  small  district  of  Galilee  or  after  his 
own  age ;  but  he  would  have  been  purer  and  more 
faultless. 

It  is  easy,  from  the  materials  which  the  critic 
allows,  to  scatter  this  vision.  We  have  seen  that 
from  the  very  first  our  Lord  meant  to  set  up  a  king- 
dom. As  his  public  ministry  advances,  the  plan 
is  developed  moie  fully  ;  but  it  is,  in  the  end,  merely 
the  fillino-  in  of  what  had  been  described  in  outline 
from  the  beginning.  The  kingdom  is  obviously  a 
spiritual  one.     But  there  was  never  a  purpose  to  set 


244  APOLOGETICS. 

aside  the  temporal  power.  He  refused  to  interfere 
in  matters  of  civil  government,  saying,  when  he  was 
called  to  decide  in  a  legal  dispute  (Luke  xii.  14), 
"Who  made  me  a  judge  or  a  divider  over  you?'' 
He  wrought  a  miracle,  in  order  to  pay  tribute,  and 
laid  down  the  important  principle  (Mat.  xxii.  21), 
"Render  unto  Csesar  the  things  which  are  Cagsar's, 
and  unto  God  the  things  that  are  God's."  Here  we 
have  a  clear  and  admirable  enunciation  of  his  doc- 
trine, both  as  to  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  and  his 
own  kingdom,  subsisting  together  and  alongside, 
each  having  a  place  and  a  sphere  :  namely,  that  in 
temporal  things  tribute,  honor,  and  obeisance  arc  to 
be  rendered  to  Caesar,  the  civil  governor ;  while  in 
spiritual  things  the  heart,  conscience,  and  worship 
are  to  be  reserved  for  God.  Our  Lord  clearly 
announces  that  his  kingdom  is  to  be  a  spiritual 
one.  And  here  I  w^ill  not  insist  on  John  iii.  3, 
where  he  sa3's,  we  must  be  born  again,  in  order  to 
enter  the  kingdom  ;  for  Renan  is  not  sure  about  this 
passage,  though  it  is  consonant  with  the  whole  teach- 
ing of  our  Lord.  The  critic  acknowledges  that 
Matthew  may  be  implicitly  trusted  as  to  our  Lord's 
discourses.  Let  us  turn,  then,  to  Mat.  xiii.,  where 
we  find  a  full  account,  by  Jesus,  of  the  nature  of 
his  kingdom.  We  see  how  the  kingdom  is  to  be 
established  and  men  brought  into  it,  v.  3,  by  the 
scattering  of  the  seed  of  the  Word  ;  and  we  should 
observe  how  it  is  declared  that  a  large  body  of  man- 
kind are  not  prepared  to  receive  that  seed,  because 
their  hearts  are  impenetrable  as  the  beaten  wayside, 


OUR    LORD'S   KINGDOM.  245 

or  thin  as  gravelly  places,  or  choked  up  as  with 
thorns.  Again,  this  kingdom  is  to  be  the  result  of 
a  long  process  and  of  growth,  and  is  to  be  so  far  a 
mixed  kingdom ;  for,  v.  24,  it  is  likened  to  a  man 
sowing  good  seed,  while  the  enemy  sows  tares,  and 
both  grow  together  till  the  harvest.  In  v.  47,  it  is 
represented  as  a  net  which  gathers  all  kinds  of 
fishes,  which  shows  that  our  Lord  saw  that  in  the 
visible  church  the  evil  was  to  come  in  with  the  good, 
and  that  his  views  and  expectations  were  never  of 
that  ideal,  Utopian  character  which  the  Frenchman 
supposes  them  to  have  been.  The  same  lesson  is 
taught  by  the  comparison  of  the  kingdom,  v.  31,  to 
a  grain  of  mustard-seed  and,  v.  33,  to  leaven.  For- 
tunately our  author  acknowledges  the  parables  to  be 
genuine :  the  disciples  had  not  genius  to  fashion 
them,  and  they  are  too  consistent  to  be  made  up  of 
legends.  The  whole  of  Luke  xv.  is  sanctioned  by 
our  sceptic,  and  we  see  from  it  who  were  to  be 
members  of  Christ's  kingdom:  v.  5,  the  lost  sheep 
brought  back  on  the  shoulders  of  the  shepherd ; 
v.  8,  the  lost  piece  of  money  saved  from  the  dust; 
V.  II,  the  lost  son  brought  back  by  the  remembrance 
of  a  father's  love  to  the  father's  house.  The  king- 
dom was  to  be  a  reign  of  God  in  men's  hearts  (Luke 
xvii.  21)  :  "Neither  shall  they  say,  lo  here!  or,  lo 
there  !  for,  behold,  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within 
you."  The  whole  object  of  our  Lord's  mission  is 
described  (Luke  xix.  10.)  :  "The  son  of  man  is  come 
to  seek  and  save  that  which  was  lost."  Renan 
quotes  twice  Mat.  xviii.  3,  where  the  necessity  of  a 


246  APOLOGETICS. 

spiritual  change  is  clearly  pointed  out:  "Verily,  I 
say  unto  you,  Except  ye  be  converted,  and  become 
as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  heaven." 

Third  Period.  We  approach  the  view  given  of 
this  period  with  aversion  :  it  so  grates  upon  our  feel- 
ings. We  would  shrink  from  the  examination  of  it 
if  we  could  ;  but  there  is  no  help  for  it :  the  charges 
have  been  brought,  and  we  must  face  them.  Jesus 
has  been  filled  with  an  idea  which  makes  him 
dizzy.*  His  idea  he  finds  is  not  to  be  realized; 
and  so  bitterness  and  reproach  affect  his  heart  more 
and  more  every  day,f  and  he  gives  way  to  feelings 
of  disappointment  and  sourness,  and  in  the  end  he 
hurries  on  to  his  death  as  a  sacrifice  which  he  cannot 
avoid.  In  order  to  set  up  his  kingdom,  he  must 
leave  Galilee  and  go  up  to  Jerusalem.  But  there 
the  scenery  is  so  sterile  and  horrid  in  Judasa,  when 
compared  with  the  smiling  northern  province,  that 
his  spirits  become  oppressed  !  The  Jewish  doctors 
cannot  appreciate  his  fine  morality  or  his  lofty 
visions,  and  the  people  are  too  indifferent  to  take 
any  notice  of  him.  He  must  do  something  to  make 
himself  known.  What  is  this  to  be?  He  must 
either  renounce  his  mission,  or  become  a  w^orker 
of  miracles. {  And  here  we  have  excuses  offered 
for  the  conduct  of  Jesus  which  grate  upon  our 
moral  sense,  and  to  which  we  indignantly  refuse  to 
listen.  Jesus  has  now  to  use  less  pure  means  :  §  he 
has  to  yield  to  opinion  and  satisfy  the  ideas  of  the 
time  :||   at  first  the  artifice  (oh  !  we  shrink  from  the 

*  p-  318-      t  p-  324-      X  P-  257-      §  P-  92-      il  pp-  160,  360. 


THIRD   PERIOD.  247 

word  as  applied  to  Jesus)  is  innocent;*  he  allows 
himself  to  be  thought  a  worker  of  miracles  against 
his  will.f  There  lives  on  the  back  of  the  Mount 
of  Olives,  where  it  begins  to  slope  from  the  sum- 
mit, a  reputable  and  loving  family,  the  members  of 
which  have  become  attached  to  Jesus.  They  are 
anxious  to  further  his  views  and  promote  his  cause. 
We  shrink  from  the  thought  of  giving  the  account 
which  follows,  as  we  would  from  repeating  a  scan- 
dal against  a  brother  or  sister,  a  father  or  mother. 
But  the  calumny  has  been  uttered,  and  we  must 
repel  it.  Martha  and  Mary  devise  a  plan  of  putting 
their  brother  Lazarus,  while  yet  living,  into  the 
tomb,  and  Jesus  consents  to  come  to  the  grave  and 
call  him  forth.  When  we  read  this,  we  feel  that  we 
must  reject  with  scorn  all  the  compliments  which 
Renan  has  been  paying  to  our  Lord  throughout  the 
volume,  when  he  lauds  him  as  so  great  and  pure,  as 
"the  individual  who  has  approached  nearest  the 
Divine,"  and  as  "the  creator  of  the  eternal  religion 
of  morality." 

But  let  us  pursue  the  development  of  the  romance, 
which  has  now  become  so  unnatural.  The  miracle 
does  call  the  attention  of  many  :  but  it  only  irritates 
the  Jewish  rulers,  and  they  conspire  to  put  Jesus  to 
death.  He  has  seen,  for  a  considerable  time,  that 
he  cannot  establish  his  kingdom.  He  becomes  bitter 
in  his  expressions  and  fierce  in  his  denunciations. 
He  feels  that  he  must  prepare  for  leaving  this  w^orld. 
He  might  have  avoided  death  ;  but  love  carries  him 
on,t    and  he  makes  the  sacrifice,  expecting    some 

*  p.  162.  t  p-  268.  X  p.  370- 


248  APOLOGETICS. 

speedy  renovation  of  the  world  to  be  brought  about 
he  knows  not  how. 

Need  I  enter  upon  any  elaborate  statement  to 
show  how  false  the  picture,  if  there  be  any  consist- 
ency in  character,  any  reality  in  the  gospel  narra- 
tives? It  can  be  established,  in  the  first  place,  that 
our  Lord  did  not  begin  to  w^ork  miracles  at  this 
time,  that  he  habitually  performed  them  from  the 
commencement  of  his  public  ministry  :  we  have  as 
good  evidence  of  this  as  of  any  other  incident  in 
his  history,  as  we  have  of  his  reputed  miracle  at 
Bethany.  The  same  John  tells  us  (chap,  ii.)  that 
he  began  his  miracles  three  years  before  at  Cana 
of  Galilee  ;  and  Matthew  gives  detailed  accounts  of 
many  miraculous  cures,  such  as  of  the  centurion's 
servant  (viii.  5-13),  and  of  the  man  with  the  palsy 
(ix.  2-6) .  Mark,  so  commended  for  the  accuracy  of 
his  narrative  of  facts,  tells  us  (iii.  15)  that  when  he 
ordained  the  Twelve,  he  gave  them  power  to  ''heal 
sicknesses." 

And  as  to  Jesus  being  engaged  in  the  alleged 
transaction  at  Bethany,  our  better  nature  sensitively 
recoils  from  it.  He  has  here  felt  himself  in  diffi- 
culties. If  he  entirely  omit  the  incident,  his  whole 
version  of  our  Lord's  life  loses  its  credibility ;  for 
we  have  an  account  of  the  transaction  —  minute, 
circumstantial,  and  consistent — by  John,  a  pro- 
fessed spectator.  And  so  our  author  gives  the 
event;  and,  as  he  cannot  admit  it  to  be  miraculous, 
he  makes  it  a  deception.  But  in  making  it  an 
artifice,  he  has  made  it  an  inconsistenc}^  an  improb- 
ability ;    indeed,    a    moral    impossibility.     Renan's 


THE  RAISING    OF  LAZARUS.  249 

version  of  it  is  before  us,  and  we  have  to  examine 
it.  If  Jesus  was  what  the  author  describes  him, 
the  purest,  loftiest,  and  most  truthful  of  men,  he 
could  not  have  done  the  deed.  If  he  did  the  deed, 
he  could  not  have  had  that  lofty  consciousness  and 
those  high  moral  aims  which  he  is  represented  as 
setting  continually  before  him.  This  critic  is  here 
in  a  dilemma ;  and  we  leave  him  exposed,  on  the 
horn  he  may  prefer,  to  the  scorn  of  all  truth- 
seeking  historical  investigators.  The  cunning 
artist  has  here  outwitted  himself,  and  has  been 
led  to  do  so  by  his  false  theory.  He  makes 
one,  represented  by  him  as  entitled  to  be  called 
"divine,"  act  as  if  he  were  a  vulgar  juggler  or  a 
wandering  professor  of  mesmerism.  If  such  an 
incongruity  were  exhibited  on  the  stage,  it  would 
be  hissed  off  it ;  as  it  is,  w^e  must  hiss  it  off  the 
stage  of  history.  That  one  who,  it  is  acknowl- 
edged, did  such  deeds  of  holiness,  endured  such 
self-sacrificing  sufferings,  and  deHvered  such  lofty 
discourses,  should  have  descended  to  so  low  a 
deception,  is  monstrous,  is  utterly  incredible.  I 
would  as  soon  believe  that  there  was  not  a  single 
honorable  merchant  or  trustworthy  tradesman  in 
our  country,  or  a  single  honest  man  or  virtuous 
woman  in  oUr  world  ;  I  would  sooner  believe  that 
my  father  never  cared  for  me,  that  my  mother  never 
loved  me,  as  that  one  so  truthful  and  sincere  and 
loving  should  have  done  so  hypocritical  an  act. 

So  far  I  w^rote  at  the  time  when  the   work  was 
published.*     I  think  it  proper  that  what  I  then  said 

*  Good  Words,  1864. 


250  APOLOGETICS. 

should  appear  in  these  Lectures,  directed  against 
the  errors  of  our  day.  For  the  charge  brought 
by  M.  Renan  is  allowed  to  remain  in  the  editions 
issued  at  present  in  the  book-stores  of  America,  and 
in  the  English  translation,  even  in  the  impressions 
bearing  the  date  of  1870.  But  it  requires  to  be 
stated  that,  after  allowing  the  allegation  to  run 
through  twelve  editions,  he  withdrew  it  in  the  thir- 
teenth edition,  published  in  1867.  He  was  driven 
from  his  first  position  by  the  remonstrances  of  schol- 
ars and  the  indignation  of  the  public,  who  feel  that 
his  insinuations  are  unjust.  For  his  first  theory  he 
has  substituted  a  second,  which  is  as  weak  as  the 
other  is  unworthy.  He  still  continues  to  insist  that 
there  were  transactions  in  which  Jesus  consented  to 
play  a  part ;  and,  with  pointed  reference  to  the  event 
at  Bethany,  that  "  there  never  was  a  great  religious 
creation  which  did  not  imply  a  little  of  that  which 
people  call  fraud."*  But  he  softens  his  language, 
and  represents  the  supposed  miracle  as  proceeding 
from  a  misunderstanding.  The  friends  of  Jesus 
thought  it  needful  that  some  wonder  should  be  per- 
formed to  impress  the  m.inds  of  the  hostile  inhabi- 
tants of  Jerusalem.  In  particular,  the  pious  sisters 
were  sure  that  it  would  melt  the  hearts  of  the  im- 
penitent, were  one  to  rise  from  the  dead.  "  No," 
said  Jesus,  "  they  will  not  believe,  though  one  should 
rise  from  the  dead."  Then  they  recalled  to  him  a 
history  with  w^hich  he  w^as  familiar,  that  of  the  poor 
good  Lazarus  covered  over  with  sores,  who  died 
and  was  carried  into. Abraham's  bosom  ;  but  he  as- 

*  Treiz.  Ed.,  App.,  p.  510. 


THE  RAISING    OF  LAZARUS.  25 1 

sured  them  that,  "if  Lazarus  should  return,  they 
would  not  believe  on  him."  In  time  misunderstand- 
ings collected  around  this  subject.  "The  hypothesis 
was  changed  into  a  fact.*  They  spoke  of  Lazarus 
as  resuscitated,  and  of  the  unpardonable  obstinacy 
which  could  resist  such  testimony."  It  was  impos- 
sible that  a  report  of  this  should  not  reach  Jerusalem, 
where  it  only  exasperated  the  enmity  of  the  rulers 
and  brought  disastrous  consequences  to  Jesus. 
This  is  certainly  a  very  slender  basis  on  which  to 
rear  such  a  structure.  M.  Renan  argues  that  there 
is  need  of  some  such  foundation.  He  refuses  to 
take  refuge  in  the  allegorical  or  mythical  theory  of 
Strauss  and  the  rational  theologians,  which  he  is 
sure  is  not  applicable  to  the  characteristic  incidents 
and  accurate  details,  as  to  our  Lord's  life,  found  in 
the  account  of  his  latter  days  in  John's  gospel,  f 
And  I  admit  to  him  that  popular  legends  may  collect 
in  nebulous  matter  round  a  very  small  nucleus. 
But  not  such  a  history  and  moral  traits  as  are  indis- 
solubly  intertwined  with  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus. 
In  the  earlier  editions,  he  fixed  on  a  foundation 
utterly  inconsistent  with  the  acknowledged  char- 
acter of  our  Lord.  In  later  editions,  he  has  nothing 
left  on  which  to  rear  such  tender  incidents  as  the 
sympathy  of  Jesus,  the  conduct  of  the  sisters,  and  the 
grand  truth  evolved  :  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and 
the  life  :  he  that  believeth  in  me,  though  he  were 
dead,  yet  shall  he  live  ;  and  whosoever  liveth  and  be- 
lieveth in  me  shall  never  die."  M.  Renan  declares 
that  the  narrative  of  the  resurrection  of  Lazarus  is 
*  PP-  372,  373-  t  App.,  p.  508. 


252  APOLOGETICS, 

bound  up  with  the  last  transactions  in  the  life  of  Jesus 
by  >sach  strict  ties,  that  if  we  reject  it  as  imaginary 
the  whole  edifice,  so  solid,  of  the  last  weeks  of  the 
life  of  Jesus,  is  crushed  by  the  same  blow. 

It  can  be  shown  that,  in  this  third  period,  Jesus 
is  unfolding  as  pure  a  morality  as  in  the  first.  Mat- 
thew, w'ho  reports  the  discourses  so  faithfully,  repre- 
sents him  as  at  this  time  summing  up  the  law  in 
love,  in  love  to  God  and  love  to  man  (chap.  xxii. 
37-40).  It  is  clear  that  he  is  developing  the  plan 
of  his  w^ork  which  had  been  all  along  before  his 
mind.  He  is  still  contemplating  the  establishment 
of  a  kingdom,  and  the  very  same  kingdom.  This 
is  brought  out  in  the  parable  reported  by  Matthew 
(xxv.  14-30),  in  which  the  master  distributes  talents 
among  his  servants,  and  departs  with  the  assurance 
that  he  will  return.  The  new  kingdom  is  to  be 
established  in  consequence  of  the  death  of  the  Son 
(Mat.  xxi.  33;  Mark  xii.  1-12).  He  had  been 
announcing  his  death  for  a  considerable  time  (Mark 
ix.  31),  "For  he  taught  his  disciples  and  said  unto 
them.  The  Son  of  Man  is  delivered  into  the  hands 
of  men,  and  they  shall  kill  him,  and  after  that  he  is 
killed,  he  shall  rise  the  third  day."  He  brings  out 
clearly  that  it  is  through  his  death  that  life  is  to  be 
imparted  to  the  church  (John  xii.  24)  :  "Verily, 
verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Except  a  corn  of  wheat 
fall  into  the  ground  and  die,  it  abideth  alone  ;  but 
if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much  fruit."  The  death 
is  an  atonement  for  sin,  for  when  he  takes  the  cup 
he  says  (Mat.  xxvi.  28)  :  "For  this  is  my  blood  of 
the  New  Testament,  w^hich  is  shed  for  many  for  the 


OUR   LORD'S  LATTER   DATS.  253 

remission  of  sins."  He  gives  instructions  as  to  the 
discipline,  communion,  and  prayer  to  be  instituted 
and  kept  up  in  the  church  when  he  should  have 
departed  (Mat.  xviii.  20):  "For  where  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  am 
I  in  the  midst  of  them."  It  is  clear  that  it  is  the 
same  kingdom  which  was  to  be  entered  by  repent- 
ance and  regeneration  that  is  to  be  continued  by 
worship  and  holy  fellowship. 

It  may  be  allowed  that  Jesus  becomes  more  faith- 
ful in  his  warnings,  first  to  the  Galileans,  and  then 
to  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem,  as  he  draws  near  the 
close  of  his  pilgrimage.  But  there  is  no  trace  of 
bitterness  or  disappointment.  The  darkness,  no 
doubt,  is  becoming  denser ;  but  the  eclipse  had 
begun  at  the  commencement  of  his  atoning  work : 
we  see  it  in  the  temptation  immediately  following 
the  baptism.  And  he  continues  as  loving,  as  ten- 
der, as  full  of  sympathy,  as  he  ever  was.  Nay, 
have  we  not  all  felt  as  if  the  prospect  of  his  death 
and  of  his  parting  with  his  disciples  imparted  an 
additional  pathos  to  these  heart  utterances  of  our 
Lord?  That  sun  looks  larger,  and  glows  upon 
us  with  a  greater  splendor  as  he  sets.  The  plant 
sends  forth  a  greater  richness  of  odor  by  being 
crushed.  The  fragrance  is  poured  forth  in  richer 
effusion  from  the  alabaster  box  when  it  is  broken. 
Certain  it  is,  that  some  of  the  tenderest  incidents  in 
our  Lord's  life  occur  towards  its  close.  It  was  at 
the  period  when  he  is  supposed  to  have  been  soured  ; 
it  was  when  he  had  left  Galilee  for  the  last  time, 
and  was  setting  his  face  steadfastly  towards  Jeru- 


254  APOLOGETICS. 

salem,  —  that  he  rebuked  the  disciples,  when  they 
were  for  calling  down  fire  from  heaven  (Luke  ix. 
55).  It  was  at  this  time  that  he  took  little  children 
in  his  arms,  when  the  disciples  would  have  driven 
them  away,  saying,  "Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven"  (Mat.  xix.  14).  It  was  in  one  of  his  last 
visits  to  Jerusalem  that  he  looked  so  complacently 
upon  the  poor  widow  casting  her  mite  into  the  treas- 
ury (Mark  xii.  42).  It  was  as  he  hung  upon  the 
cross  that,  turning  to  Mary,  he  said,  "Woman, 
behold  thy  son  ;  "  and,  turning  to  John,  he  said, 
"  Behold  thy  mother."  I  know  that  our  critic  has 
cast  doubts  on  this  incident,  but  very  fruitlessly.  A 
great  living  historian  has  argued  that  certain  letters 
must  be  genuine  ;  for,  on  the  supposition  that  they 
are  fictitious,  they  must  have  been  written  by  a 
Shakspeare.  The  argument  is  not  altogether  con- 
clusive, for  they  might  have  been  written  by  one 
with  a  genius  like  that  of  our  great  poet.  Now  we 
here  argue  in  the  same  way  :  but  our  argument  is 
conclusive,  for  none  but  the  highest  poet  could  have 
conceived  such  an  incident;  and  the  evangelists, 
however  highly  elevated  spiritually,  had  not  the 
skill  of  our  unmatched  dramatist.  The  same  may 
be  said  of  the  comfortable  assurances  given  by  our 
Lord  to  the  thief  on  the  cross,  "To-day  thou  shalt 
be  with  me  in  Paradise  ; "  and  of  his  dying  prayer, 
"Father,  forgive  them  ;  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do."  This  petition,  and  the  confiding  expression, 
"  Into  thy  hands  I  commend  my  spirit,"  were  the 
fitting  close  of  a  life  devoted  to  the  redemption  of 
man  and  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  glory. 


IX. 


Unity  of  our  Lord's  Life,  —  In  the  Accounts  given  of 
Him,  —  In  His  Method  of  Teaching,  — In  His  Person, 
—  And  in  His  Work. 

TN  this  Lecture  I  am  to  show  that  the  life,  the 
character,  and  mission  of  our  Lord  are  one  in 
idea,  in  purpose,  in  accompHshment,  and  result. 
In  doing  this  I  have  two  ends  in  view.  One  is  to 
furnish  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  whole. 
M.  Renan  argues  that  we  have  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  and  the  Parables  very  much  as  Jesus 
delivered  them  ;  for  the  evangelists  were  incapable 
of  conceiving  them,  and  if  they  had  attempted  to 
add  or  to  alter  they  would  have  spoiled  them.  It  is 
the  same  with  our  Lord's  life.  It  is  a  conception 
which  no  Galilean,  Jew,  Greek,  Oriental,  or  Roman 
could  have  formed,  and  which  could  not  have  grown 
into  such  beauty  and  consistency  out  of  popular  tradi- 
tion. Another  purpose  may  also  be  accomplished ; 
and  that  is,  to  show  that  in  accepting  Christ's  life  we 
must  accept  it  entire,  —  doctrine,  miracles,  and  pre- 
cepts. Our  Lord's  life  is  woven  throughout  and 
without  seam,  and  cannot  be  divided  :  we  must  either 
take  all  or  get  none. 

(i)    IVe  have  four  Gospels,  and  yet  the  account 


256  APOLOGETICS. 

which  they  give  is  one.  There  is  a  beautiful  unity 
and  consistency  in  the  character  and  acts  of  our 
Lord  as  exhibited  by  the  whole  four. 

But  then  it  is  said  that  there  are  discrepancies  and 
contradictions  in  their  narratives  when  compared 
one  with  another.  And  there  certainly  is  not  in 
these  biographies  that  labored  consistenc}^  which 
we  always  find  in  a  trumfed-uf  story,  and  w^iich 
so  prejudices  all  w^ho  are  in  the  way  of  shrewdly 
estimating  testimony.  The  writers  are  artless  in 
every  thing;  but  they  are  specially  so  in  this,  that, 
conscious  of  speaking  the  truth,  they  are  not  careful 
to  reconcile  what  they  say  in  one  place  wdth  what 
they  or  others  may  say  in  another  place.  I  admit 
that  we  have  such  differences  as  are  always  to  be 
found  in  the  reports  of  independent  witnesses  ;  but 
I  deny  that  there  are  contradictions.  Commentators 
may  differ,  and  are  at  liberty  to  do  so,  as  to  the 
explanations  which  they  offer  of  tlie  apparent  dis- 
crepancies. All  meanwhile  may  agree  in  declar- 
ing that  the  difficulties  arise  solely  from  our  not 
knowing  more  than  the  evangelists  have  told  us, 
and  that  they  w^ould  vanish  if  we  knew  all  the  cir- 
cumstances. To  -illustrate  what  I  mean  in  a  very 
familiar  way :  One  day,  when  passing  along  the 
streets  of  the  city  in  which  I  lived  at  the  time.  I  saw 
that  there  was  a  house  on  lire  about  half  a  mile  off; 
and  as  I  happened  to  have  an  official  interest  in  a 
dwelling  in  that  quarter,  used  for  a  philanthropic 
purpose,  I  proceeded  towards  the  spot.  Meeting  a 
person  who   seemed  to  be  coming  from  the  fire,  I 


APPARENT  DISCREPANCIES.  257 

asked  him  where  it  was,  and  he  told  me  it  was  in  a 
certain   street.     Passing  on  towards   that   street,    I 
asked   another  person  where   the  fire  was,  and  he 
gave  me  the  name, of  a  difi'erent  street.     I  asked  a 
third   witness  about  the   fire:   he   told   me   he   had 
been  there,  and  it  was  nearly  extinguished.     I  met 
a  fourth  individual  a  little  way  farther  on,  and  he 
informed  me  that  it  was   blazing  with  greater  fury 
than  ever.     Had  I  stopped  here,  I  might  have  been 
tempted  to  say.  What  a  bundle  of  contradictions  !  — 
one  says  the  fire  is  in  one  street,  and  another  that  it 
is  in  a  different  street :   one  says  that  the  flames  are 
nearly    extinguished    and    another    says    they    are 
increasing ;  and  had  I  stopped  it  might  have  been 
impossible  for   me  to  reconcile  the  inconsistencies. 
But  I  had  reason  to  be  concerned   about  that  fire, 
and  so  I  went  on,  and  found  that  all  the  witnesses 
had   spoken   the   truth.     The   house  was  a  corner 
one,  between  the  two  streets  which  had  been  named  : 
the  flames  had  been  kept  down  for  a  time,  but  after- 
•  wards   burst   forth    with    greater    fury    than    ever. 
Nowhere  in  these  Gospels  do  we  meet  with   such 
violent    discrepancies   as   I    had  in   the    statements 
of   these  four  men.       But  I   have   a   deep  interest 
in  the  depositions  of  the  evangelical  biographers. 
For  there   is   a   fire    burning    in    the    earth,  a  fire 
burning    in   my  bosom,   and   I   am  supremely  con- 
cerned to  know  how  it  may  be  extinguished,   as  I 
hope   it   may  be  by  Him  of  whom  these  witnesses 
testify  ;   and  I  go  on  to  combine   their  declarations, 
and  to  inquire  whether,   after  all,  there  be  any  real 


258  APOLOGETICS. 

contradictions.       I    take    up    those   passages  dwelt 
upon  by  the  infidel. 

Luke  tells  us,  ii.  i:  "And  it  came  to  pass  in 
those  days,  that  there  went  out  a  decree  from  Cesar 
Augustus,  that  all  the  w^orld  should  be  taxed ; " 
dTToynucfuoOai  Ttaaav  ti]v  or/.ovfitniv :  that  the  whole  Ro- 
man world  should  be  enrolled.  "  (And  this  taxing 
[or  census]  was  first  made  when  Cyrenius  was 
governor  of  Syria.)  And  all  went  to  be  taxed  [or 
enrolled],  every  one  into  his  own  city.  And  Joseph 
also  went."  Now  it  so  happens  that  Josephus, 
usually  a  correct  historian  as  to  his  own  times,  tells 
us  that  Cyrenius,  or  Quirinius,  took  charge  of  a 
taxation  in  Judea,  but  at  a  considerably  later  date. 
Proceeding  on  this,  the  infidel  tells  us  that  Luke 
must  be  wrong  here  ;  and  Renan  argues  that  the 
whole  account  of  our  Lord's  being  born  in  Beth- 
lehem must  be  a  later  legend,  inserted  to  make  our 
Lord's  birth  correspond  to  the  prophecy  of  Micah. 
I  remember  that  when  I  was  a  student  of  theology 
we  were  greatly  perplexed  with  this ;  for  the  key 
to  unlock  the  mystery  had  not  then  been  found. 
But  later  German  scholarship  has  very  much 
cleared  up  this  subject.  It  is  shown  first  that  the 
two  Roman  historians,  Tacitus  and  Suetonius, 
represent  Augustus  as  issuing  about  this  time  an 
edict,  that  throughout  the  empire  and  the  allied 
States  there  should  be  accounts  taken  of  the 
number  of  the  inhabitants,  of  the  property,  and 
its  liability  to  taxation, — this,  years  before  the  tax- 
ation mentioned  by  Josephus.     Then,  secondly,  a 


L^£CONCILIATION  OF  DIFFERENCES.      259 

German  scholar,  Zumpt,  has  shown  that  in  the  roll 
of  the  successive  Syrian  proconsuls  there  occurs  a 
blank  at  that  time,  and  reasons  can  be  given  for 
filling  up  the  blank  with  the  name  of  Quirinius, 
who  appears  to  have  been  governor  of  Syria  from 
about  A.  u.  c.  750  to  753.  Thus  it  turns  out  that 
both  Luke  and  Josephus  are  right :  there  was  first 
a  census  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  and  then  a  taxing 
at  a  later  date ;  and  Quirinius  had  to  do  with  both. 
And  it  is  a  circumstance  worthy  of  being  mentioned, 
that  Luke,  wiser  than  his  critics,  seems  to  have 
known  of  both ;  and  as  he  mentions  the  one  in  his 
Gospel,  so  he  refers  to  the  other  in  his  second 
work.  Acts  V.  37,  where  he  speaks  of  Judas 
of  Galilee  rising  up  in  the  days  of  the  taxing. 

This  discovery  helps  us  to  clear  up  another  diffi- 
culty. Roman  law,  says  M.  Renan,  did  not  require 
Joseph  and  Mary  to  leave  Nazareth,  the  place 
where  they  dwelt,  and  go  up  to  Bethlehem,  in  order 
to  have  their  names  enrolled.  All  true,  as  regards 
Roman  law.  But  when  Jesus  was  born  (two  years 
after  it  would  have  been  different),  Herod,  an  ally 
of  Augustus,  was  king  of  Judea,  which  was  gov- 
erned by  Jewish  and  not  by  Roman  law;  and, 
according  to  Jewish  law,  the  place  to  which  they 
had  to  go  in  order  to  be  enrolled  was  Bethlehem,  as 
they  were  both  of  the  house  and  lineage  of  David, 
and  had  legal  claims  there,  according  to  the  Jew- 
ish law  of  inheritance.  Thus  the  objection  turns 
against  him  who  urges  it,  and  shows  a  beautiful 
correspondence,  of  the  nature  of  an  undesigned  coin- 


26o  APOLOGETICS. 

cidence,  between  the  Jewish  law  and  customs  and 
the  narrative  of  the  evangehst.  Luke,  by  simply 
speaking  the  truth,  has  avoided  a  blunder  into 
which  his  critic,  with  all  his  learning,  would  have 
fallen,  had  he  constructed,  as  he  has  endeavored  to 
construct,  a  gospel.  We  see  how  men  who  simply 
speak  what  they  know  will  always  be  justified  in 
the  end,  while  those  who  would  construct  artificial 
narratives  will  be  exposed,  sooner  or  later. 

As  to  the  apparent  discrepancies  between  the 
evangelists,  there  is  often  room  for  difference  of 
opinion  as  to  the  proper  reconciliation  ;  and  a  candid 
man  may  often  find  it  proper  to  say,  I  believe  both 
accounts,  and  I  am  sure  they  could  be  reconciled 
if  w^e  knew  the  whole  facts.  Sometimes  the  diffi- 
culty is  to  be  removed  by  supposing  that  the  two 
evangelists  are  not  recording  the  same  events,  but 
different  incidents  so  far  alike.  It  is  clear  that  our 
Lord  proceeded  on  a  system  or  method  in  the  deeds 
he  performed,  and  was  in  the  way  of  performing 
very  much  the  same  sort  of  deeds  at  different  times 
and  places.  Thus  we  have  him  multiplying  loaves 
and  fishes  on  two  several  occasions.  Matthew  tells 
us  (xv.  32-39 ;  see  also  Mark  viii.  1-9)  that  Jesus 
fed  four  thousand,  but  he  had  previously  told  us 
that  he  had  fed  five  thousand ;  and  if  he  had  not 
done  so,  the  infidel  might  have  urged  that  Matthew 
(xv.  32-39)  was  contradicted  by  John  (vi.  5-16), 
where  we  are  told  that  five  thousand  w^ere  fed.  It 
is  clear  that  there  were  two  such  transactions  ;  that 
Mark   records   the   one   and   John  the  other,  while 


GENEALOGIES    OF   OUR  LORD.  26 1 

Matthew  details  both.  It  appears  then  that  we  may 
remove  some  of  the  seeming  inconsistencies  by  help 
of  the  principle,  that  our  Lord  having  certain  spe- 
cific ends  in  view,  to  be  accomplished  by  certain 
kinds  of  works,  does  often  repeat  himself,  even  as 
God  the  Creator  repeats  himself  by  like  organs  and 
members  and  plants  and  animals  and  earths  and 
moons  and  suns  running  through  all  creation. 
More  frequently  we  are  to  account  for  the  seeming 
discrepancy  by  the  very  simple  and  intelligible  fact, 
that  one  witness  gives  one  feature,  and  another  sup- 
plies a  different  feature,  and  that  we  are  to  combine 
the  two,  if  we  would  have  the  whole  figure  before 
us.  As  an  example  of  the  first,  I  may  refer  to  the 
healing  of  the  nobleman's  son  (John  iv.  46-54), 
when  our  Lord  was  at  a  distance,  which  is  not  the 
same  as  the  healing  of  the  centurion's  servant  (Matt. 
viii.  5-13)  :  for  though  the  two  incidents  resemble 
each  other,  both  being  after  the  type  of  our  Lord's 
miracles,  yet  they  are  not  the  same  ;  for,  in  the  one 
case,  the  person  cured  was  a  son,  in  the  other  he 
was  a  servant.  As  an  example  of  the  second,  —  that 
is,  of  the  two  recorded  incidents  being  the  same,  — 
I  quote  Matt.  viii.  5-13,  where  the  occurrence  is  the 
same  as  that  of  the  centurion's  servant  (Luke  vii. 
i-io),  though  the  two  narrators  give  difi:erent -details 
of  one  and  the  same  transaction. 

There  is  a  palpable  discrepancy  between  the 
genealogy  of  our  Lord  as  given  by  Matthew  and 
by  Luke.  In  saying  so,  I  do  not  refer  merely  to 
the  circumstance   that  the   one   goes  back  only   to 


262  APOLOGETICS. 

Abraham,  whereas  the  other  ascends  to  Adam ; 
but  to  real  differences  in  the  account.  The  number 
of  ancestors  in  the  two  rolls  is  not  the  same,  nor 
are  the  individual  names  identical.  Matthew's  divi- 
sion into  three  fourteens  gives  forty-two  ancestors 
from  Jesus  to  Abraham,  whereas  Luke  reckons 
fifty-six.  Matthew  (i.  6)  makes  the  descent  from 
David  through  Solomon  ;  whereas  Luke  (iii.  31) 
makes  it  from  David  through  Nathan,  "which  was 
the  son  of  Nathan,  which  w^as  the  son  of  David." 
Some  have  tried  to  explain  this  by  supposing  that 
Matthew  gi'C^es  the  genealogy  through  the  Virgin 
Mary  (i.  16)  :  "Joseph  the  husband  of  Mary,  of 
whom  was  born  Jesus,  who  is  called  Christ ; " 
whereas  Luke's  is  confessedly  the  genealogy 
through  Joseph  (iii.  23),  "being,  as  was  supposed, 
the  son  of  Joseph,  which  was  the  son  of  Heli." 
Now  there  is  no  doubt  that  Joseph  and  Mary  were 
both  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  the  family  of  David  : 
it  is  probable  that  Mary,  the  mother  of  Jesus,  was 
the  daughter  of  Jacob,  and  first  cousin  to  Joseph, 
her  husband.  But  this  very  circumstance  renders 
it  impossible  for  us  to  reconcile  the  differences,  for  it 
would  make  the  lineage  one  backward  from  the 
grandfather  of  Joseph  and  Mar}^  whereas  they  are 
different  throughout.  The  subject  has  been  taken 
up  and  discussed  with  great  care  and  a  large  amount 
of  success,  by  Lord  Arthur  Hervey,  in  an  elaborate 
volume.*  Matthew's  genealogy,  he  argues,  is 
meant  to  show  that  Jesus  was  legal  successor  to  the 

*  Genealos^ies  of  our  Lord. 


GENEALOGIES  OF  MATTHEW  AND  LUKE.  263 

throne  of  David  ;  and  dierefore  his  descent  is  traced 
through  the  line  of  kings,  —  through  Solomon,  Reho- 
boam,  Abia,  and  Asa,  and  Jehosaphat,  andjehoram, 
and  so  forth.  Luke,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  his 
private,  his  natural,  his  family  genealogy,  which 
he  traces  back  to  David  through  Nathan.  Matthew 
shows  that  he  was  legally  the  heir  of  the  throne  of 
David,  through  the  monarchs  of  Judah  and  their 
legal  descendants.  Luke  brings  out  the  real  pro- 
genitors, who  were  not  kings,  though  descended 
from  David.  You  may  understand  what  I  mean,  if 
you  consider  that  a  man  might  be  the  legal  heir  of 
a  property  which  was  not  possessed  by  his  father 
or  grandfather,  or  actual  progenitors  for  generations 
immediately  past.  In  such  a  case  he  might  have 
two  genealogies,  one  through  the  persons  possess- 
ing the  property,  the  other  of  his  proper,  natural 
progenitors.  By  this  simple  principle  the  author 
brings  the  two  accounts  into  harmony.  To  give 
only  one  example  :  The  two  genealogies  coincide 
in  the  name  of  Matthan,  or  Matthat,  (Matt.  i.  15, 
and  Luke  iii.  24),  "  to  whom  two  different  sons,  Jacob 
and  Heli,  are  assigned  but  one  and  the  same  grand- 
son and  heir,  Joseph  the  husband  of  Mary."  The 
simple  and  obvious  explanation  is,  "that  Joseph  was 
descended  from  Joseph,  a  younger  son  of  Abiud  (the 
Juda  of  Luke  iii.  26),  and  that,  on  the  failure  of  the 
line  of  Abiud's  eldest  son  in  Eleazar,  Joseph's  grand- 
father Matthan  became  the  heir ;  that  Matthan  had 
two  sons,  Jacob  and  Heli ;  that  Jacob  had  no  son, 
and  consequently  that  Joseph,  the  son  of  his  younger 


264  APOLOGETICS. 

brother  Heli,  became  heir  to  his  uncle  and  to  the 
throne  of  David.  Thus,  the  simple  principle  that 
one  evangelist  exhibits  that  genealogy  which  con- 
tained the  successive  heirs  to  David  and  Solomon's 
throne,  while  the  other  exhibits  the  paternal  stem 
of  him  who  was  the  heir,  explains  all  the  anomalies 
of  the  two  pedigrees,  —  their  agreements  as  well  as 
their  discrepancies,  and  the  circumstance  of  their 
being  two  at  all." 

As  to  how  it  comes  that  there  should  be  such  a 
resemblance  between  the  first  three  Gospels  and 
yet  such  diversities,  there  is  room  for  difi:erence  of 
opinion  among  those  who  -  may  speculate  on  the 
subject.  The  following  seems  to  me  the  most  prob- 
able theor}',  —  it  is  sanctioned  by  some  profound 
German  scholars  :  The  particular  incidents  of  Gos- 
pel history  had  been  so  repeatedly  narrated  by  the 
apostles  in  their  interview's  one  with  another,  and 
in  their  addresses  to  the  church,  that  a  certain  type 
of  narrative  had  formed  itself.  "The  particular 
points,  especially  in  sayings  of  Christ,  were  always 
reproduced :  unusual  expressions  were  the  more 
firmly  retained,  since,  when  they  were  uttered,  they 
had  more  strongly  attracted  the  attention  of  the 
disciples.  Sermons  and  sayings  were  naturally 
retained  with  more  care,  and  reported  with  more 
uniformity,  than  incidents ;  although  even  in  the 
latter,  in  the  same  degree  that  the  incident  was  sur- 
prising and  peculiar,  a  fixed  type  of  narration  had 
involuntarily  formed  itself."  It  is  thus  we  have 
found  the  members  of  a  family,  who  have  often  had 


THE  SYNOPTICS  AND  JOHN'S   GOSPEL.    265 

occasion  to  talk  to  one  another  and  to  others  of  the 
virtues  of  a  deceased  parent,  coming  to  repeat  the 
same  incidents  in  much  the  same  language.  In  some 
such  way  as  this  we  are  to  account  for  the  curious 
sameness  of  event  and  phrase  in  the  account  given. 
As  to  the  differences,  they  are  easily  explained  by 
each  writer  so  far  following  an  independent  course, 
as  a  witness  and  narrator,  and  having  a  special  end 
in  view.  Matthew  wrote  specially  to  the  Hebrews  ; 
and,  as  he  declares  (i.  i),  he  sets  before  us  Jesus 
as  the  son  of  David  and  the  son  of  Abraham,  the 
Messiah  promised  by  the  prophets.  Mark  ex- 
hibits Jesus  (see  i.  i)  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  dwells 
forcibly  on  his  deeds  of  power.  Luke,  the  com- 
panion of  Paul,  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  shows, 
as  he  professes  (iii.  38),  how  Jesus  "  was  the  son  of 
Adam,  which  was  the  son  of  God." 

As  to  the  obvious  circumstance  that  John's  Gospel 
differs  so  much  from  the  others,  not  only  in  the  nar- 
rative, but  in  the  sort  of  discourses  put  into  our 
Lord's  mouth,  I  have  never  thought  that  it  raises 
any  very  formidable  difhculty.  John  tells  us  at  the 
close  of  his  Gospel,  "  And  there  are  also  many  other 
things  which  Jesus  did,  the  which,  if  they  should 
be  written  every  one,  I  suppose  that  even  the  world 
itself  could  not  contain  the  books  that  should  be 
written."  Of  the  things  which  he  did,  of  the  words 
which  he  spake,  we  have  only  a  few  recorded. 
The  first  three  evangelists  give  us  so  much  :  they 
give  us  what  had  been  inscribed  most  deeply  on  the 
hearts  and  memories  of  the  apostles  at  Jerusalem, 


266  APOLOGETICS. 

each,  however,  writing  independently  of  the  others. 
John  wrote  his  Gospel  at  a  later  date,  and  he  stu- 
diously brings  out  other  incidents  of  our  Lord's  life, 
and  new  features  of  his  character.  I  believe  that 
each  writer  presents  our  Lord  under  the  aspect 
which  most  impressed  him.  Every  scholar  knows 
that  we  have  something  very  much  parallel  in  Gre- 
cian history.  We  have  two  separate  and  independent 
accounts  of  the  great  Greek  teacher,  who,  of  all 
heathens,  most  resembles  our  Lord  in  his  life, 
in  his  teaching,  and  in  his  death,  though  in  all 
respects  falling  infinitely  beneath  the  perfect  model. 
One  of  these  is  by  Xenophon,  a  soldier,  a  man  of 
the  world,  and  trained  in  the  business  of  life  :  he 
has  given  us  a  plain  narrative  of  the  acts  and  com- 
mon conversation  of  Socrates,  bringing  out  fully 
to  view  his  earnestness,  his  shrewdness,  his  high 
moral  aims,  and  his  exalted  views  of  the  providence 
of  God.  The  other  is  by  Plato,  the  lofty  speculator, 
the  skilful  dialectician,  and  the  writer  of  such  prose 
as  only  a  poet  of  the  highest  order  could  compose. 
In  the  Socrates,  of  the  Platonic  dialogues,  we  have 
the  subtle  analyst,  the  acute  cross-questioner,  the 
exposer  of  pretension,  the  master  of  the  most  deli- 
cate irony,  and  the  profound  lover  of  wisdom,  w^ho 
can  penetrate  into  the  greatest  depths  to  bring  forth 
gold,  and  mount  like  Franklin's  kite  into  the  heavens 
to  draw  down  li£»;htnincr ,  Whence  the  difference  of 
the  two  representations?  Some  have  at  once  and 
peremptorily  declared  that,  while  the  one  is  a  true 
picture,  the   other  is  an  ideal  figure   drawn   in  the 


5  O  CRA 1  'E  S  OF  XENOPH  ON  A  ND  PL  A  TO.     267 

rich  colors  of  Plato's  own  mind.  I  have  pondered 
much  on  this  subject ;  and  I  am  convinced  that  both 
are  correct  portraits,  and  of  the  same  individual, 
but  in  different  attitudes  and  when  in  different 
humors.  I  allow  freely  that  Plato  does  at  times  use 
Socrates  merely  as  a  vehicle  for  expressing  his  own 
ideal  speculations,  and  puts  his  own  sentiments  and 
language  into  the  mouth  of  his  master.  But  I  am 
firmly  convinced  that  Plato,  after  all,  gives  a  true 
picture  of  one  side  of  Socrates's  character,  and  brings 
out  lofty  characteristics  which  Xenophon  was  not 
capable  of  comprehending,  or  at  least  of  appre- 
ciating. I  argue  this  from  the  circumstance  that  in 
the  plainer  narrative  of  Xenophon  we  have  thoughts 
here  and  there  ascribed  to  Socrates  which  carry  us 
up  towards  that  empyrean  in  which  Plato  makes 
him  habitually  dwell;*  while  Plato,  ever  and  anon, 

*  Thus,  in  Xenophon's  Memorabilia,  B.  iv.  c.  iv.,  we  have  a 
dialogue  with  Hippias  of  Elis  concerning  Justice,  very  much  in 
the  spirit  of  the  .dialogues  of  Plato.  ''Hippias.  I  think  that  I 
have  certainly  something  to  say  now  which  neither  you  nor  any 
other  person  can  refute.  Socrates.  By  Juno,  it  is  a  great  good 
you  say  you  have  discovered ;  since  the  judges  will  now  cease 
from  giving  contradictory  sentences,  the  citizens  will  cease  from 
disputing  about  what  is  just,  from  going  to  law  and  from  quar- 
relling, and  communities  will  cease  from  contending  about  their 
rights  and  going  to  war;  and  I  know  not  howl  can  part  with 
you  till  I  have  learned  so  important  a  benefit  from  its  discoverer. 
Hippias.  You  shall  not  hear  it,  by  Jupiter,  until  you  yourself 
declare  what  you  think  justice  to  be ;  for  it  is  enough  that  you 
laugh  at  others,  questioning  and  confuting  everybodj^  while  you 
yourself  are  unwilling  to  give  a  reason  to  anybody,  or  to  declai-e 
your  opinion  on  any  subject.  Socrates.  What,  then,  have  you 
not  perceived  that  I  never  cease  declaring  my  opinions  as  to  what 
I  conceive  to  be  just,"  &c.  —  IVatsous  Translation. 


268  APOLOGETICS. 

brings  him  down  to  the  earth  and  makes  him  utter 
practical  maxims  quite  in  the  spirit  of  the  conversa- 
tions detailed  by  the  other  biographer. 

It  is  much  the  same  with  the  two  accounts  which 
we  have  of  the  life  of  our  Lord,  that  in  the  Synop- 
tical Gospels  on  the  one  hand,  and  that  in  John's 
Gospel  on  the  other.  Both  are  true,  and  both  are 
delineations  of  the  same  lofty  character  standing 
on  the  earth,  but  with  his  head  in  the  sunshine  of 
heaven.  I  argue  so  from  the  fact  that  in  Matthew, 
Mark,  and  Luke,  we  have  here  and  there  sayings 
of  our  Lord  quite  in  the  spirit  of  those  recorded  by 
John ;  and  that  in  John  there  are  plain  familiar 
statements  quite  in  the  manner  of  the  first  three 
evangelists.  Thus  the  address  of  Jesus,  in  Matt. 
xi.  25,  reads  as  if  it  were  recorded  by  John:  "At 
that  time  Jesus  answered  and  said,  I  thank  thee, 
O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  because  thou 
hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  prudent,  and 
hast  revealed  them  unto  babes.  Even  so.  Father, 
for  so  it  seemed  good  in  thy  sight.  All  things  are 
delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father ;  and  no  man 
knoweth  the  Son,  but  the  Father ;  neither  knoweth 
any  man  the  Father,  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom- 
soever the  Son  will  reveal  him."  On  the  other  hand, 
certain  narratives  in  John  read  as  if  they  had  been 
written  by  Matthew  or  Luke,  as  (v.  8)  :  "And  a 
certain  man  was  there,  which  had  an  infirmity  thirty 
and  eight  years."  "Jesus  saith  unto  him.  Rise,  take 
up  thy  bed,  and  walk.  And  immediately  the  man 
was  made  whole,  and  took  up  his  bed,  and  walked : 


yESUS    UNDER    DIFFERENT    VIEWS.     269 

and  on  the  same  day  was  the  Sabbath,"  &c.  It  is 
the  same  person  ;  but  the  two  portraits,  though  both 
correct  hkenesses,  are  different,  in  that  one  brings 
one  set  of  attitudes  or  expressions  into  prominence, 
and  another  a  different  set.  In  the  one  we  have 
certain  quaHties  w^hich  all  the  disciples  compre- 
hended and  rehshed,  and  we  have  specially  his 
human  side  brought  fully  into  view  ;  whereas  the 
aposde  who  leaned  on  his  bosom,  and  evidently 
looked  into  that  bosom,  and  was  w^armed  by  it,  has 
brought  out  perfections  of  our  Lord  founded  in  the 
depths  of  his  divine  nature.  From  that  day  to  this 
the  great  body  of  Christians  have  always  turned  first 
to  the  Synoptic  Gospels  ;  while  there  have  always 
been  a  select  few  who  have  felt  that  the  disciple  of 
love  carries  them  closer  to  the  inner  nature,  to  the 
heart  of  Jesus.  We  should  thank  God  for  providing 
both,  that  all  and  each  may  find  something  to  attract 
the  eye  and  gain  the  confidence  of  the  heart. 

The  light  which  comes  from  the  sun  is  one  and 
the  same  ;  but  how  different  are  the  colors  as  re- 
flected from  different  objects  !  The  same  rays  fall 
on  every  part  of  that  plant,  but  from  the  leaves  are 
reflected  the  soft  and  lively  green,  and  from  the 
flowers  the  deeper  purple  or  the  brighter  red  or 
yellow.  So  it  is  with  Him  who  is  expressively 
called  the  sun  of  righteousness  and  the  light  of  the 
world:  he  shone  on  all  the  evangelists  alike,  but 
each  reflects  the  hue  that  most  impressed  him.  I 
am  tempted  once  more  to  use  a  familiar  illustration 
from  my  own  history.     My  father  died  when  I  was 


270 


APOLOGETICS. 


a  boy,  and  I  have  a  dimmer  recollection  of  him 
than  I  could  wish.  In  order  to  get  a  clearer  idea 
of  him,  I  have  applied  to  different  persons.  I  have 
applied  to  neighbors ;  I  have  applied  to  elder 
sisters;  I  have  applied  to  a  nearer  still,  to  his 
widow  and  my  mother.  The  accounts  given  by 
them  were  substantially  one ;  -but  they  differed  in 
some  points,  and  the  most  endearing  of  all  was 
by  the  dearest  friend.  I  believe  that  the  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved  was  able  to  enter  into  and  recip- 
rocate some  of  the  deepest  and  yet  the  most 
delicate  of  the  characteristics  of  our  Lord.  As 
being  himself  struck  with  them,  he  has  recorded  the 
incidents  and  preserved  the  discourses  in  which 
they  were  exhibited.  It  is  in  John's  Gospel  that  it 
is  so  pressed  upon  us  (chap,  iii.)  that  there  must 
be  a  spiritual  change  before  we  can  enter  the  king- 
dom of  God;  and  (in  chap,  vi.)  that  we  must  Teed 
by  faith  on  the  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  if  we 
would  have  life  in  us.  It  is  in  this  same  Gospel 
that  we  have  so  tender  a  view  of  the  sympathy 
of  Jesus  as  he  wept  over  the  grave  of  Lazarus 
(chap,  xi.)  ;  such  gracious  promises  of  the  out- 
pouring of  the  Spirit  (xiv.  and  xvi.)  ;  and  of  the 
intimate  relation  betw^een  the  Father  and  the  Son 
(x.  30) ,  —  "I  and  my  Father  are  one  ;  "  and  of  the 
followship  between  the  Father  and  the  Son  (in 
chap,  xvii.),  — "  O  righteous  Father,  the  world  hath 
not  known  "thee  :  but  I  have  know^n  thee,  and  these 
have  known  that  thou  hast  sent  me.  And  I  have 
declared   unto  them  thy  name,  and  will  declare  it : 


JOHN'S  PICTURE    OF   CHRIST.  27 1 

that  the  love  wherewith  thou  hast  loved  me  may  be 
in  them,  and  I  in  them." 

May  I  not  go  a  step  farther?  May  we  not  with- 
out presumption  believe  that  Jesus  unfolded  his 
doctrine  as  his  listeners  were  able  to  bear  it  ?  *If  I 
address  Sabbath-school  children,  I  speak  in  one 
way ;  if  I  preach  to  a  congregation  on  the  Sabbath, 
I  have  to  speak  in  a  different  manner ;  if  I  lecture 
to  a  class  in  college,  I  have  to  speak  in  yet  a  third 
way.  I  am  ashamed  to  refer  to  myself  in  such  a 
connection.  But  if  man  with  imperfect  knowledge 
and  small  resources  has  to  do  this,  may  we  not 
suppose  that  He  in  whom  dwelt  all  wisdom  was 
ready  to  pour  it  out  in  the  measure  which  his 
hearers  could  receive  it?  I  am  inclined  to  think 
that,  while  all  received  much,  John  took  in  most, 
and  *so  has  been  able  to  give  out  most,  of  the  pro- 
fundity of  our  Lord's  doctrine  and  the  tenderness 
of  his  sentiment.  However  we  may  account  for  it, 
there  is  certainly  a  glow  rich  and  pure  and  yet 
somewhat  mystic,  as  if  it  required  to  be  dulled  be- 
fore we  could  gaze  upon  it,  round  our  Lord's  person, 
as  we  gaze  upon  him  in  the  light  in  which  he  is 
presented  in  the  pages  of  the  beloved  apostle. 

And  as  to  the  apostle's  own  style  in  his  Gospel 
and  in  his  three  Epistles  being  so  like  that  of  our 
Lord,  we  are  to  account  for  it  as  we  explain  the  same- 
ness of  style  in  prose,  poetry,  and  painting,  on  the 
part  of  pupils  and  the  masters  whom  they  admire. 
I  believe  it  is  to  be  traced  to  the  circumstance  that 
John,  as  he  leant  upon  the  bosom  of  his  Master,  had 


272  APOLOGETICS. 

drunk  into  his  spirit,  and  moulded  himself  in  style 
as  in  character  upon  the  great  Exemplar. 

(2)  There  is  a  unity  in  our  Lord's  method  of 
teaching.  Every  one  sees  and  feels  at  once  that 
there  is  something  peculiar  in  his  manner  of  im- 
parting instruction.  It  originates  with  himself:  it 
is  fresh  and  novel.  It  differed  equally  from  the  two 
modes  employed  by  the  eminent  teachers  of  his 
time,  from  the  Rabbinical  method  of  the  Jewish 
doctors  and  the  Dialectic  method  of  the  Greek  and 
Roman  philosophers. 

It  differed  from  the  Rabbinical  method,  w^hich 
appeared  soon  after  the  Babylonish  captivity, 
which  became  permanently  embodied  in  the 
Mishna  and  Talmud,  written  some  ages  after  the 
time  of  our  Lord,  and  has  been  continued  by 
the  Jewish  doctors  to  this  day.  Those  who  look 
into  the  Jewish  works  see  a  considerable  amount 
of  acuteness  and  ingenuity  running  to  w^aste,  and 
may  find  precious  grains  of  wheat  here  and  there 
in  bushels  of  chaff\  The  Rabbinical  teachers  pro- 
fessed to  be  expounders  of  the  Old  Testament 
Law,  but  they  paid  no  regard  to  its  spirit  and  its 
moral  lessons.  The  passage  was  studied  with  the 
view  of  drawinof  from  it  formal  restrictions  and 
ingenious  conceits.  Passing  by  the  obvious  mean- 
ing, they  discovered  a  deep  signification  in  certain 
words  and  phrases,  and  drew  inferences  from 
particles  and  the  position  of  particles.  In  doing 
this  they  indulged  in  ingenious  fancies,  and  labo- 
riously employed  themselves  in    constructing  silly 


THE  RABBINICAL   METHOD.  273 

legends,  dealing,  as  Paul  says  (i  Tim.  i.  4),  in 
fables  and  genealogies.  These  were  handed  down 
from  father  to  son,  and  in  the  course  of  ages  so 
accumulated  that  they  overloaded  the  simple  truth, 
and  buried  it  in  dust  as  effectively  as  the  ashes  from 
Vesuvius  buried  Pompeii  and  Herculaneum.  All 
the  commandments  were  interpreted  in  a  narrow 
spirit,  and  minute  regulations  laid  down  as  to  tlie 
outward  conduct  and  smaller  duties,  —  the  tithing 
of  mint,  anise,  and  cummin, — while  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law  were  neglected.  Not  only  so, 
but  by  the  additions  which  they  made,  they  often 
perverted  the  whole  meaning  and  spirit  of  the  law. 
Thus  in  regard  to  the  fifth  commandment :  "Ye  say, 
Whosoever  shall  say  to  his  father  or  his  mother  it  is 
a  gift,  by  whatsoever  thou  mightest  be  profited  by 
me,  and  honor  not  his  father  or  his  mother,  he  shall 
be  free.  Thus  have  ye  made  the  commandment 
of  God  of  none  effect  by  your  traditions."  It  was 
thus,  too,  that  they  perverted  the  seventh  command- 
ment, by  giving,  under  one  pretext  or  other,  unre- 
stricted liberty  of  divorce.  In  such  interpretations 
they  differed  as  widely  from  each  other  as  they  did 
from  Scripture ;  and  this  gave  rise  to  numerous 
schools,  which  contended  with  each  other,  and  all 
in  the  same  spirit,  thus  gendering,  as  Paul  expresses 
it  (i  Tim.  vi.  4),  "  questions  and  strifes  of  words." 
Our  Lord  must  have  been  familiar  with  this  mode 
of  instruction  ;  and  the  people  knew  what  it  was,  as 
they  listened  to  the  teaching  in  the  synagogue  from 
Sabbath  to  Sabbath.     Jesus  proceeds  in  an  entirely 


274 


APOLOGETICS. 


different  manner,  and  the  people  at  once  discover 
it.  It  is  said  of  him,  after  dehvering  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount :  "  It  came  to  pass  when  Jesus  had 
ended  these  sayings,  the  people  were  astonished  at 
his  doctrine.  For  he  taught  them  as  one  having 
authority,  and  not  as  the  Scribes."  Going  beneath 
the  outward  conduct,  he  seeks  to  reach  and  to  sway 
the  motives,  and  requires  and  enforces  a  change  of 
heart,  saying,  "Except  ye  be  converted,  and  become 
as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  heaven."  "Out  of  the  heart  proceed  evil 
thoughts,  murders,  adulteries,  fornications,  thefts, 
false  witness,  blasphemies  :  these  are  the  things  that 
defile  a  man  :  but  to  eat  with  unwashen  hands  defi- 
leth  not  a  man."  Our  Lord  takes  great  pains  in  his 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  to  correct  these  perversions 
of  the  Jewish  doctors,  to  remove  the  rubbish  of 
traditions,  and  to  bring  back  his  hearers  to  the  true 
interpretation  of  the  spirit  of  the  law,  —  showing 
how  the  sixth  commandment,  in  forbidding  murder, 
condemns  all  the  malignant  passions  which  lead  to 
it;  how  the  seventh,  in  forbidding  adultery,  con- 
demns all  the  thoughts  and  lusts  which  might  end 
in  the  outward  act.  In  dealing  wdth  mankind,  he 
seeks  first  to  gain  their  faith  and  confidence  ;  he  en- 
courages them  by  forgiving  their  sins  and  curing 
their  maladies,  if  they  have  an}^  and  then  brings 
them  under  the  law  of  love.  "  Thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  wdth  all  thy 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind.  This  is  the  first  and 
great  commandment.    And  the  second  is  like  unto 


THE   DIALECTIC   METHOD.  275 

it,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself."  His 
hearers  felt  that  they  were  listening  to  a  very  dif- 
ferent teacher  from  any  they  had  ever  heard  be- 
fore :  "  who  taught  them  as  one  having  authority, 
and  not  as  the  Scribes."  But  his  method  differed 
as  essentially  from  the  other  employed  in  his  day  ; 
from  — 

The  Dialectic  Method^  or  the  method  of  the 
heathen  philosophers.  The  Apostle  Paul  knew 
both.  Bred  at  the  feet  of  Gamaliel,  one  of  the  most 
famous  of  the  Jewish  doctors,  he  knew  the  Rab- 
binical Method,  and  would  evidently  have  been 
inclined  to  follow  it,  had  he  not  been  taught  by  a 
higher  Master,  who  cast  down  his  pride  on  the 
road  to  Damascus,  and  made  him  receive  instruction 
as  a  little  child,  and  drink  in  a  new  spirit.  And  he 
also  knew  the  other  method  from  his  acquaintance 
with  the  schools  of  Greek  Philosophy,  acquired 
at  Tarsus,  a  city  of  no  mean  reputation  for  Greek 
learning.  He  refers  to  it  once  and  again,  calling 
it  "the  wisdom  of  words,"  "the  wisdom  of  this 
world."  "The  Jews,"  he  says,  "require  a  sign: 
the  Greeks  seek  after  wisdom."  I  call  it  the  Dia- 
lectic Method.  The  phrase  was  applied  first  to 
the  Eleatic  School,  which  indulged  in  subtle  dis- 
tinctions as  to  the  nature  of  being ;  and  the  method 
was  used  more  or  less  by  all  the  Greek  and  Roman 
speculative  thinkers,  and  in  many  cases  degenerated 
into  mere  quibbling,  into  sophistic  or  eristic.  Do 
not  understand  me  as  speaking  against  the  study 
of  the  ancient  philosophy,  so  much  superior  to  that 


276  APOLOGETICS. 

to  which  some  of  our  colleges  would  turn  the  mind 
of  our  youth  in  the  present  day,  —  the  wretched 
and  debasing  systems  of  positivism  or  materialism. 
The  "  Memorabilia  "  of  Xenophon,  with  its  lessons 
of  Socrates  ;  the  "  Dialogues  of  Plato  ;  "  the  logical 
and  metaphysical  works  of  Aristotle  ;  and  the  moral 
maxims  of  the  Stoics,  particularly  the  "  Meditations  " 
of  Marcus  Aurelius,  —  are  about  the  highest  products 
of  human  intellect  in  ancient  times,  and  are  worthy  of 
the  eager  study  of  any  educated  man.  But  how 
different  from  the  discourses  of  Jesus,  both  in  their 
subjects,  and  manner  of  treadng  them  !  First,  the 
Greek  philosophies  treat  chiefly  of  speculative  ques- 
tions, of  the  nature  of  substance,  the  origin  of 
w^orlds,  the  elements  out  of  which  all  things  are 
produced ;  and  they  do  not  investigate  them  in  the 
Method  of  Induction  introduced  by  Bacon,  —  that 
is,  by  the  careful  collation  of  facts,  — but  by  subtle 
analysis,  by  discussion,  by  arguments  on  the  one 
side  or  other ;  and  some  of  them,  such  as  Plato  and 
the  Academic  sect,  scarcely  profess  to  reach  any 
settled  or  satisfactory  results.  None  of  them  pro- 
fesses to  speak  with  authority ;  and  most  of  them 
leave  the  great  religious  and  moral  quesdons,  —  as, 
for  instance,  in  regard  to  the  nature  of  God  and  the 
immortality  of  the  soul,  —  in  a  state  of  doubt  and 
uncertainty.  Where  mankind  have  no  other  light, 
when  there  is  no  light  shining  upon  them  from 
heaven,  men  may  usefully  resort  to  such  tapers  to 
help  them  to  grope  their  way  in  the  darkness.  But 
Christ  can  speak,  and  does  speak,  in  a  very  differ- 


OUR   LORD'S    TEACHING.  277 

ent  manner.  He  resorts  to  no  sophistic  distinctions, 
or  lengthened  ratiocinations  difficult  to  follow,  liable 
to  be  disputed,  and  in  which  subtle  error  may  lurk ; 
but  he  speaks  as  one  having  authority.  He  claims 
such  authority,  —  authority  to  speak  the  truth  con- 
cerning God  and  the  world  to  come ;  authority  to 
lay  down  and  explain  the  law,  and  to  point  out  the 
way  by  which  man  may  rise  to  eternal  fellowship 
with  God.  And  as  he  speaks,  we  feel  that  he  has 
authority  to  do  so.  He  tells  us  much  which  we 
could  never  have  discovered  of  ourselves  ;  but  when 
he  announces  it,  there  is  something  in  us  which 
responds  to  it.  All  history  shows  that  mankind  are 
not  able  of  themselves  to  discover  the  unity  of  God 
and  his  holy  and  spiritual  nature  :  but  when  Christ 
proclaims  it  in  the  Word,  we  see  that  it  is,  that  it 
must  be,  true.  Unaided  reason  has  never  arisen  to 
a  pure  conception  of  the  moral  law ;  but  when  it  is 
proclaimed  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  there 
is  found  to  be  a  law  in  the  heart  which  approves 
of  it.  Jesus  speaks  as  having  authority,  and  there  is 
a  conscience  in  us  which  declares  that  we  ought  to 
bow^  before  it.  We  might  not  yield  to  the  Scribes  : 
there  is  nothing  in  their  formal  rules  and  endless 
restrictions  to  gain  our  better  nature.  We  may 
refuse  to  give  in  to  the  acute  arguments  of  the 
Greeks  :  we  might  rather  be  tempted  to  square  arms 
and  fight  them,  and  to  raise  objections  and  start 
theories  of  our  own.  But  when  Christ  speaks,  and 
tells  us  of  "  God  who  is  a  Spirit,"  and  of  the  temper 
which  we  ought  to  cherish,  and  the  duties  devolving 


278  APOLOGETICS. 

on  us,  we  feel  that  we  cannot,  that  we  should  not, 
resist,  that  we  ought  at  once  to  bow  before  him  in 
implicit  faith  and  willing  obedience. 

We  recall  many  able  reasoners,  many  eloquent 
orators,  in  ancient  and  modern  times,  in  ancient 
Greece  and  Rome,  in  modern  Europe  and  America  ; 
but  here  is  one  who  is  different  from  them  all,  and 
who  speaks  as  never  man  spake.  The  truth  is  so 
perspicuous  and  so  profound,  that  we  are  sure  it  is 
uttered  from  the  clear  depths  of  heaven  ;  and  yet,  as 
it  comes  to  us  and  penetrates  us,  we  feel  that  it  has 
come  through  one  who  is  on  the  earth,  who  knows 
what  is  in  man,  who  knoweth  our  frame  and  re- 
membereth  that  we  are  dust ;  we  feel  that  it  is 
addressed  to  us  by  a  fellow-man,  by  a  brother,  —  it 
so  touches  and  melts  and  moves  our  hearts.  The 
discourses  of  men  of  profound  thought  have  com- 
monly tended  to  drive  away  little  children ;  but  the 
words  of  Jesus,  as  it  were,  say,  "  Suffer  the  little  chil- 
dren to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not."  Plato 
and  the  Greek  philosophers  spoke  and  wrote  only 
for  the  educated,  and  never  thought  of  addressing 
the  great  mass  of  the  people,  who  were  in  fact 
despised  by  them.  But  the  prediction  regarding 
Christ  was,  not  only  that  he  would  open  the  eyes  of 
the  blind,  but  that  by  him  the  poor  were  to  have  the 
gospel  preached  to  them ;  and  it  was  found  in  fact 
that  "  the  common  people  heard  him  gladly."  This 
constituted  a  new  era  in  the  histor}-  of  the  world,  as 
it  was  the  means  of  raising  the  great  mass  of  the 
people.     While  a  child,  a  savage,  can  understand  and 


UNITY  OF  PERSON.  279 

appreciate  our  Lord's  discourses,  the  profoundest 
thinkers  are  made  to  feel  that  there  are  depths  here, 
deeper  than  hell,  which  they  cannot  fathom  ;  heights 
higher  than  heaven  which  they  cannot  gauge.  We 
feel  as  we  do  when  w^e  gaze  into  the  expanse  of 
heaven  on  a  clear  night,  and  see  every  star  shining  so 
distinctly,  and  yet  are  made  to  realize  that  there  are 
depths  there  far  beyond  our  vision.  When  officers 
were  sent  out  by  the  Jewish  council  to  apprehend 
Jesus,  they  were  induced  to  listen ;  and,  as  they  did 
so,  they  were  awed,  and  felt  themselves  incapable 
of  fulfilling  their  purpose,  and  returned  to  say  so  to 
those  who  commissioned  them.  And  not  a  few  who 
have  begun  to  read  his  words,  with  the  view  of  find- 
ing fault  and  getting  matter  to  condemn  him,  have 
been  obliged  to  say,  "Never  man  spake  like  this 
man." 

(3)  There  is  a  unity  in  the  account  given  of  the 
Person  of  our  Lord.  Everywhere  Christ  is  spoken 
of  and  acts  as  man,  fully  and  altogether  man.  Thus 
is  he  foretold  in  the  prophecies,  thus  he  appears  on 
the  earth.  Of  the  race  of  Adam,  the  seed  of  the 
woman,  the  seed  of  Abraham,  the  son  of  David, 
born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  —  he  has  all  the  sinless 
characteristics,  bodily  and  mental,  of  our  nature, 
liable  to  weakness,  acquainted  with  grief,  full  of  the 
milk  of  human  kindness  and  of  compassion.  The 
biographers  speak  of  him  as  born ;  as  growing  in 
wisdom  and  stature  ;  as  wearied,  athirst,  hungry  ;  as 
rejoicing,  sorrowing,  in  pain  ;  bleeding,  dying,  and 
being  buried.     The  language  of  John  is  as  express 


28o  APOLOGETICS. 

on  this  subject  as  that  of  the  other  three  evangelists. 
For  he  tells  us  that  the  Word  became  flesh  and 
dwelt  among  us  ;  and  some  of  the  most  human  inci- 
dents of  his  life  are  recorded  by  this  evangelist, 
such  as  his  close  intimacy  with  the  two  sisters, 
Martha  and  Mary,  and  their  brother  Lazarus. 
When  speaking  of  himself,  he  takes  the  name  of  the 
Son  of  Man, — the  representative  man,  the  model 
man.  He  shows  us  what  man  would  have  been  had 
he  not  sinned  ;  and  yet  shows  what  man  had  never 
been  had  he  not  sinned,  and  produced  suffering  to 
call  forth  sympathy.  He  shows  us  what  man  puri- 
fied is  to  become  in  heaven  ;  and  yet  what  man  will 
not  be  in  heaven,  for  in  lieaven  there  will  be  no 
sin  nor  suffering  to  call  forth  forgiveness  and  pity 
such  as  Christ  exhibited  on  earth.  Thus  is  he  man, 
but  unique  as  man,  flowing  pure  as  a  river  through 
the  midst  of  pollution,  which  calls  forth  the  deepest 
commiseration,  and  which  he  would  sweep  away 
without  himself  being  stained  by  it. 

But  while  he  is  man,  very  man,  it  is  clear  that  he 
is  something  more.  This  appears  everywhere  on 
the  surface;  and  as  we  dig  down,  we  see  how  deep 
it  goes,  and  we  find  that  it  is  ever  casting  up.  It 
has  often  been  noticed  that  the  inspired  writers 
seldom  take  the  trouble  of  asserting  that  God  exists  : 
they  no  more  think  it  needful  to  do  so  than  to  assert 
their  own  existence.  They  assume  that  God  exists, 
and  they  presume  that  men  believe  in  his  existence, 
and  proceed  to  give  a  revelation  of  his  will.  In  like 
manner  they  are   not  in   the   way  of  asserting  that 


WORSHIP  PAID    TO   JESUS.  28 1 

Christ  is  a  divine  person,  but  they  proceed  upon  the 
doctrine  as  allowed  by  the  Church.     The   doctrine 
is  very  prominent  in  John's  Gospel,  where  Jesus  is 
represented  as  the  Word  who  was  "in  the  beginning," 
:'  who  was  with  God,"  —  an  expression  which  shows 
that  he  was  somehow  difterent  from  the  Father,  and 
yet  "was  God"  and  the  Maker  of  all  things.     But 
the  same  truth   is  constantly  implied  in  the   other 
Gospels,  and  is  expressly  stated  ever  and  anon.     If 
there    is    any   doctrine    more   forcibly   taught   than 
another  in  Scripture,  it  is  that  there    is    only  one 
God,  and  that  he  will  not   allow  worship  to  be  paid 
to  any  other.     When  Peter  went  into  the  house  of 
Cornelius,  the  centurion  would  have  fallen  down  and 
worshipped  him ;  but  the  apostle  hastened  to  raise 
him  up,  saying,  "Stand   up:  I  myself  also  am   a 
man."   When  Paul  and  Barnabas  performed  a  nota- 
ble miracle  at  Lystra,  the  ignorant  heathens  mistook 
them  for  the  gods  come  down  to  earth,  and  would 
have  done  sacrifice  with  the  people ;    but  Paul  and 
Barnabas  were  shocked  at  the  proposal,  and  ran  in 
among  them  and  cried,  "Why  do  ye  these  things? 
We  also  are  men  of  like   passions  with  you."     But 
once  and  again  divine  honors  are  paid  to  Jesus,  and 
he   accepts  them:  Matt.  viii.  2,  a  leper  came   and 
worshipped  him;  ix.  18,   a  ruler  worshipped  him; 
xiv.  33,  they  that  were  in  the  ship  w^orshipped  him; 
XV.  25,  the  woman  of  Canaan  came  and  worshipped 
him,  — and  he  receives  the  homage,  not  as  if  he  were 
vain  of  it,  but  as  if  it  were  his  due.     It  is  in  the  close 
of  Matthew,  \^ritten  specially  to  the  Hebrews,  who 


282  APOLOGETICS. 

Stood  up  so  resolutely  for  the  unity  of  God,  that  our 
Lord  is  represented  as  requiring  all  his  followers  to 
be  baptized  in  the  name  of  three  persons  :  Matt, 
xxviii.  19,  "Go  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

But,  with  two  such  natures,  he  is,  after  all,  one,  — 
quite  as  much  so  as  the  plant  composed  of  animate 
and  inanimate  matter  is  one  ;  quite  as  much  so  as  the 
animal  composed  of  a  bodily  and  a  sentient  part  is 
one  ;  quite  as  much  so  as  man  composed  of  body 
and  mind  is  one.  How  there  should  be  such  a 
union  we  are  unable  to  say,  just  as  we  are  not  able 
to  tell  how  our  soul  and  body  are  united,  and  work 
so  harmoniously.  To  separate  the  divine  and  hu- 
man natures  in  Christ,  we  feel  to  be  like  separating 
soul  and  body  in  man,  — the  destruction  and  death 
of  the  whole. 

A  living  English  writer  has  tried  to  give  us  one 
of  these  aspects  of  our  Lord  without  the  other.  I 
refer  to  Professor  Seeley,  of  London  University  Col- 
lege, who,  in  "Ecce  Homo,"  has  exhibited  some 
very- interesting  and  attractive  views  of  our  Lord's 
character.  I  have  known  some  young  men,  whose 
faith  w^as  being  undermined,  being  profited  by  the 
study  of  tlie  work  ;  and  the  pictures  which  he  pre- 
sents are  so  pure  and  lovely  that  I  have  known  none 
who  have  been  injured  by  it.  Those  who  go  heart- 
ily with  him,  and  as  far  as  he  goes,  will  feel  that 
they  cannot  stay  there ;  that  in  consistency  they 
must  go  farther,  and  take  a  profounder  view  of  One 


UNITY  OF    WORK  AND   END.  283 

represented  as  so  enlightened  and  spiritual,  but  who, 
to  do  what  he  is  represented  as  doing,  must  have 
been  more  than  man,  who  as  he  claimed  to  be  God 
must  really  be  divine.  The  features  which  he  has 
portrayed  so  gracefully  are  those  which  we  may 
conceive  to  have  struck  a  young  Church  of  England 
man,  of  cultured  taste,  who  has  been  trained  in  the 
criticism  of  the  age,  and  at  a  university  where  the 
highest  refinement  is  imparted,  and  where  all  old 
religious  opinions  are  being  unsettled,  but  who  feels 
that,  whatever  he  may  give  up,  he  cannot  give  up 
Christ.  He  shows  clearly  that  Christ  from  the  be- 
ginning proposed  to  set  up  a  kingdom  of  a  spiritual 
character,  and  with  high  social  aims,  such  as  Eng- 
lish churchmen  delighted  to  picture  and  expected 
to  realize  when  established  churches  were  in  no 
danger.  But  he  has  not  seen,  after  all,  the  true  na- 
ture of  Christ's  kingdom,  which  is  to  be  entered  by 
the  strait  gate  of  conversion,  and  to  be  composed 
of  men  born  again  of  the  Spirit.  "Marvel  not 
that  I  said  unto  you  that  ye  must  be  born  again." 
Marvel  not:  it  cannot  be  otherwise.  Our  nature 
requires  it ;  and  the  kingdom  is  such  that  it  requires 
a  radical  change  before  men  can  enter  it. 

(4)  There  is  a  unity  in  his  Work  and  in  the 
End  zvhich  he  seeks  to  accomplish.  His  mission 
was  one  throughout,  —  that  of  one  sent  from  the 
Father,  sent  into  the  world  for  mercy  and  not  for 
judgment ;  travelling  ever  with  a  heavy  load  upon 
hin^,  having  for  the  fulfilling  of  his  purposes  to 
suffer   and  to  die.     The    load    of   responsibility  is 


284  APOLOGETICS. 

seen  to  be  lying  upon  him  at  the  age  of  twelve. 
"  I  must  be  about  m}'  Father's  business  ; "  showing 
that,  while  he  was  subject  to  Joseph  and  Mary,  he 
had  another  Father,  and  a  work  to  do  of  which  they 
had  no  idea.  He  keeps  the  same  aim  before  him 
through  all  his  pilgrimage,  in  all  his  discourses, 
and  in  all  his  deeds. 

Fortunately  I  am  no^  called  in  these  Lectures  to 
enter  on  the  wide  subject  of  miracles,  which  I 
have  discussed  elsewhere.*  The  school  which  I 
am  opposing,  admitting  no  a  -priori  \x\x\}^^  cannot  in 
consistency  urge  any  a  -priori  objections  against 
surpernatural  occurrences.  Mr.  Mill  in  particular 
has  argued  that  it  is  possible  to  prove  a  miracle,  j 
I  am  in  these  Lectures  to  show  that  there  is  evidence 
that  Jesus  performed  deeds  beyond  the  capacity  of 
man  and  the  laws  of  nature. 

We  cannot  take  the  discourses  of  our  Lord  and 
reject  his  deeds.  We  cannot  accept  his  words  and 
repel  his  miracles.  His  discourses  are  among  the 
greatest  of  his  miracles.  They  would  have  been  a 
miracle  coming  from  any  man,  from  a  Greek  in 
the  farthest  advanced  stage  of  his  nation's  culture  : 
they  are,  a  fortiori^  a  miracle,  as  uttered  by  a  w^ork- 
man  from  Galilee.  We  have  evidence,  it  is  con- 
ceded, to  prove  that  his  natural  life  must  have  been 
such  as  is  detailed  in  the  four  Gospels ;  and  that  he 
delivered  his  discourses  very  much  as  they  have 
been  reported.     But  it  is  impossible  to  separate  be- 

*  The  Supernatural  in  relation  to  the  Natural, 
t  Logic,  B.  III.  c.  XXV. 


MIRACLES  AND   SAVINGS.  285 

tween  his  ordinary  acts  and  discourses  on  the  one 
hand,  and  his  miracles  on  the  other :  they  are 
woven  through  and  through  each  other  as  weft  and 
woof.  They  could  be  separated  only  by  tearing 
the  garment  to  pieces.  Let  us  notice  that  super- 
natural acts  are  mixed  up  with  every  part  of  our 
Lord's  life  ;  in  particular  how  they  mingle  with  his 
discourses,  so  that  some  of  his  profoundest  say- 
ings arose  out  of  his  miracles.  We  have  a  detailed 
account  in  the  Gospels  of  between  thirty  and  forty 
miracles,  besides  such  general  references  as,  "  Now 
when  the  sun  was  setting,  all  they  that  had  any 
sick  with  divers  diseases  brought  them  unto  him  : 
and  he  laid  his  hands  on  every  one  of  them,  and 
healed  them  (Luke  iv.  40,  cf.  Matt.  viii.  16,  Mark 
i.  32)  ;  and  again  in  his  message  to  the  Baptist 
(Matt.  xi.  5),  "The  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deal 
hear,  the  dead  are  raised  up." 

Let  us  look  at  some  of  these  miracles,  that  we 
may  see  how  they  are  mixed  up  indissolubly  with 
some  of  the  first  and  most  peculiar  features  of  his 
character,  and  with  some  of  the  deepest  of  his  say- 
ings. His  miracle  of  turning  water  into  wine  is 
associated  with  his  sanctioning  of  marriage  and  the 
marriage  feast,  and  his  delicate  way  of  promoting 
the  social  joys  of  the  poor  (John  ii.  i-ii).  At  his 
first  public  appearance  at  Jerusalem,  after  the  com- 
mencement of  his  ministry,  he  performs  such  mir- 
acles that  Nicodemus  comes  to  him  and  says,  "No 
man  can  do  these  miracles  that  thou  doest,  except 


286  APOLOGETICS. 

God  be  with  him  ;  "  and  at  the  interview  our  Lord 
tells  him  that  a  man  enters  the  kingdom  of  God 
by  a  spiritual  change.  The  miraculous  draught  of 
fishes  (Luke  v.  i-ii)  is  associated  with  the  charac- 
teristic trait  of  Peter  falling  down  at  Jesus'  knees, 
saying,  "  Depart  from  me  ;  for  I  am  a  sinful  man,  O 
Lord  ;  "  and  our  Lord's  giving  so  special  a  mission 
to  his  disciples,  "  Fear  not :  from  henceforth  thou 
shalt  catch  men."  The  fear  of  the  apostles  when 
the  storm  arose  to  such  a  pitch  on  the  Sea  of  Gali- 
lee, our  Lord's  being  asleep,  and  then  rising  and 
rebuking  the  winds  and  the  sea,  is  felt  to  be  beauti- 
fully symbolic  and  prophetic  of  his  w^hole  mission 
(Matt.  viii.  23-27  ;  Mark  iv.  35-41  ;  Luke  viii. 
22-25).  The  raising  of  Jairus'  daughter,  and  of 
the  widow's  son  at  a  later  date,  both  illustrate  his 
sympathy  with  parents  grieving  over  the  death  of 
beloved  children.  The  healing  of  the  woman  with 
the  issue  of  blood  brings  out  some  very  interesting 
features  of  the  suppliant :  she  was  unwilling  to  be 
seen,  and  had  such  faith  that  she  was  sure  that  if 
she  "but  touched  the  hem  of  his  garment  she  would 
be  made  w^hole  ; "  and  when  she  was  brought  forth, 
she  came  trembling,  and  he  said,  "  Go  in  peace,  and 
be  whole  of  thy  plague."  The  healing  of  the  para- 
lytic (Matt.  ix.  1-8)  leads  him  to  assume  the  power 
of  forgiving  sins,  and  to  connect  his  healing  wdth 
his  forgiving  power:  "But  that  ye  may  know^  that 
the  Son  of  man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins 
'then  saitli  he  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy),  Arise,  take 
up  thy  bed."    The  cleansing  of  the  leper  brings  out 


MIRACLES  AND   SAVINGS.  287 

very  beautifully  the  nature  of  faith,  and  the  way  in 
which  Jesus  responds:  "Lord,  if  thou  wilt,  thou 
canst  make  me  clean,"  to  which  the  answer  is,  "  I 
will ;  be  thou  clean  "  (Matt.  viii.  2,  3).  The  healing 
of  the  heathen  centurion's  servant  (Matt.  viii.  5-13  ; 
and  Luke  vii.  i-io)  gives  us  glimpses  of  the  in- 
gathering of  the  Gentiles  into  the  kingdom  of  God  : 
"  I  say  unto  you,  I  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no, 
not  in  Israel."  —  "Many  shall  come  from  the  east 
and  from  the  west,  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham 
and  Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
The  healing  of  the  impotent  man  at  the  pool  of 
Bethesda,  followed  by  our  Lord's  bidding  him  take 
up  his  bed,  and  walk,  on  the  Sabbath,  leads  him  to 
the  condemnation  of  the  Pharisaic  view  of  the  Sab- 
bath, and  the  profound  saying,  "  My  Father  worketh 
hitherto,  and  I  work"  (John  v.  17).  The  feeding 
of  the  five  thousand  gives  rise  to  that  discourse 
so  full  of  spiritual  meaning,  in  which  our  Lord 
expounds  his  doctrine  as  to  his  body  being  meat 
indeed,  and  his  blood  being  drink  indeed  (John  vi. 
27  to  end).  His  walking  on  the  sea,  and  inviting 
Peter  to  come  to  him,  led  to  the  declaration,  "Be 
of  good  cheer;  it  is  I;  be  not  afraid"  (Matt.  xiv. 
22-23).  "^^^^  opening  of  the  eyes  of  one  born  blind 
originates  all  those  deeply  interesting  and  instructive 
discourses  in  John  ix.,  and  to  the  man  being  cast  out 
of  the  synagogue.  The  restoring  of  the  man  with 
the  withered  hand  leads  to  his  gracious  declaration, 
"But  if  ye  had  known  what  this  meaneth,  I  will 
have  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice,  ye   would  not  have 


288  APOLOGETICS. 

condemned  the  guiltless,"  and  to  the  true  doctrine 
of  the  Sabbath  (Matt.  xii.  7-13).  The  cleansing  of 
the  ten  lepers  brings  out  the  instructive  incident  so 
characteristic  of  human  nature,  that  only  nine  re- 
turned to  give  thanks  (Luke  xvii.  11-19).  The 
healing  of  the  daughter  of  the  Syrophenician  woman 
unfolds  the  importunateness  of  faith  and  the  cer- 
tainty of  its  bringing  a  blessing.  It  is  the  finding 
of  the  coin  in  the  fish's  mouth  which  leads  him  to 
enforce  the  duty  of  paying  tribute.  The  raising  of 
Lazarus  discloses  to  our  view  nearly  every  tender 
feature  in  our  Lord's  character  :  "Jesus  wept."  —  "  I 
am  the  resurrection,  and  the  life ;  he  that  believeth 
in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live :  and 
whosoever  liveth,  and  believeth  in  me,  shall  never 
die."  The  healing  of  Malchus'  ear  (Luke  xxii. 
49-51),  besides  being  a  proof  of  our  Lord's  ten- 
derness in  very  trying  circumstances,  taught  the 
disciples  the  nature  of  the  instruments  by  which 
they  were  to  propagate  the  truth  ;  that  is,  not  by  the 
sword,  but  by  spiritual  weapons.  The  resurrection 
of  our  Lord  is  the  very  keystone  of  the  believer's 
hopes.  And  what  a  rich  fragrance  gathers  round 
the  incidents  of  our  Lord's  life  after  his  resurrection, 
from  his  rising  from  the  grave  to  his  ascending  into 
heaven  I  M.  Renan  allows  that  Jesus  himself  did 
not  distinguish  between  the  natural  and  the  super- 
natural. I  am  sure  that  our  Lord  did  not  deceive 
himself  here.  The  supernatural  was  to  him  as  easy 
as  the  natural ;  the  supernatural  was  as  it  were 
natural  to   him  ;  and   the  two  so  mingle   in   every 


HIS  MIRACLES  AND  MISSION.  289 

part  of  his  public  life  that  it  is  vain  to  seek  to  sepa- 
rate them,  and  to  take  the  one  without  also  taking 
the  other. 

Our  Lord's  miracles  are  a  piece  with  his  dis- 
courses, with  his  whole  life,  mission,  and  kingdom. 
It  has  been  asserted  or  insinuated  that,  though  Jesus 
may  be  supposed  to  have  lived  and  to  have  spoken 
very  much  as  he  is  described,  his  miracles  may. 
have  been  inserted  by  a  later  hand.  But  it  is 
utterly  inconceivable  that  miracles  thus  added 
should  have  so  fitted  into  all  the  rest,  —  in  design, 
spirit,  and  moral  and  spiritual  lessons.  Who  added 
these  miracles  entirely  in  consonance  with  the 
whole  purport  of  our  Lord's  life  ?  Certainly  not 
Matthew  or  Mark,  acknowledged  to  be  men  of  no 
genius  or  invention.  If  it  be  said  that  they  rose  up 
as  popular  stories,  the  answer  is  at  hand :  They 
would  in  this  case  have  been  incongruous,  blunder- 
ing, inconsistent,  as  all  legends  are.  We  know 
what  was  the  character  of  some  of  the  legends 
which  sprang  up  about  this  time,  —  as,  for  example, 
the  miracles  ascribed  to  Simon  Magus  by  his 
followers.  He  is  represented  as  flying  through  the 
air,  as  transforming  himself  into  a  serpent  or  goat, 
as  putting  on  two  faces,  as  rolling  himself  unhurt 
upon  burning  coals,  as  making  statues  to  talk,  and 
dogs  of  brass  or  stone  to  bark.*  Depend  upon  it, 
this  would  have  been  the  sort  of  miracles  ascribed 
to  our  Lord,  had  they  sprung  from  the  wonder- 
loving  spirit  of  the  times.      I   know  a  famous  hall 

*  Trench's  Notes  on  the  Miracles,  c.  ii. 
13 


290 


APOLOGETICS. 


in  a  European  city,  left  all  but  complete  by  the 
architect  when  he  died:  he  left  only  the' stair  and 
one  or  two  minor  parts  unfinished,  but  no  living 
man  could  carry  out  his  grand  conception  ;  and  all 
the  portions  added  by  others  are  acknowledged  to 
be  failures.  I  hold  that  if  Jesus  had  left  any  part 
of  his  work  unfinished,  no  man  could  have  added 
to  it  without  the  addition  being  seen  to  be  an  incon- 
sistency and  an  encumbrance. 

Our  Lord's  miracles  were  all  essential  parts  of  his 
one  consistent  life.  They  were  wrought  as  evi- 
dences not  only  of  his  power,  but  of  his  mercy. 
They  were  throughout  moral  in  their  character, 
and  spiritual  in  the  ends  contemplated  by  them. 
They  were  in  fact  embodiments  of  his  whole 
character,  exemplars  of  his  whole  teaching,  em- 
blems of  his  whole  mission.  They  consisted  almost 
exclusively  in  the  remedying  of  evils,  in  renova- 
tions and  regenerations.  There  were  some  ex- 
ceptions no  doubt,  but  these  too  were  moral.  There 
were,  in  particular,  two  miracles  of  judgment  to 
exhibit  the  justice  of  God  ;  but  it  is  remarkable  that 
one  of  these  was  wrought  on  an  unconscious  ^.g- 
tree,  and  the  other  on  the  lower  animals,  as  if  He 
who  came  to  save  men's  lives  were  unwilling  to 
smite  them.  Both  were  directed  against  hypocrisy 
and  inconsistency  :  in  the  one  he  smote  the  fig-tree, 
which  should  in  these  regions  have  brought  forth 
first  fruit  and  then  leaves,  but  had  produced  leaves 
and  no  fruit,  —  like  too  many  professors  of  religion  ; 
by  the  other  he  punished  the  Gadarenes,  who  kept 


MIRACLES    OF  HEALING. 


291 


swine  contrary  to  the  law  of  Moses,  which  they 
professed  to  reverence.  But,  with  these  instructive 
exceptions,  all  his  other  miracles  were  miracles 
of  restoring,  of  reviving,  of  saving ;  and  so  were 
symbols  of  the  works  of  Him  who  came  to  seek  and 
to  save  that  which  was  lost.  The  parables  of  the 
lost  sheep  brought  back,  of  the  lost  money  found, 
of  the  lost  son  in  his  father's  embrace,  have  all  their 
counterparts  in  the  diseased  being  made  whole,  in 
the  lame  walking,  and  the  dead  restored  to  life. 
His  grand  redeeming  and  saving  mission  is  seen 
quite  as  clearly  in  his  miracles  as  in  his  dis- 
courses. 

Every  one  must  have  observed  that  a  large 
number  of  the  miracles  of  our  Lord  consist  in  the 
healing  of  diseases.  There  was  evidently  a  moral 
meaning,  a  spiritual  lesson,  in  this.  Disease  is  to 
the  body  what  sin  is  to  the  soul :  the  one,  like  the 
other,  is  a  disorder,  a  derangement.  The  cure 
of  the  one  is  a  type  of  the  healing  of  the  other. 
He  who  removed  the  one  showed  that  it  was  his 
mission  to  remove  the  other  likewise.  He  who 
cured  the  paralytic  showerd  that  he  had  power  on 
earth  to  forgive  sins  :  "  But  that  ye  may  know  that 
the  Son  of  man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive 
sins  (then  saith  he  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy).  Arise, 
take  up  thy  bed,  and  walk.  And  he  arose,  and 
departed  to  his  house  "  (Matt.  ix.  6).  These  two  go 
together  :  "  Who  forgiveth  all  thine  iniquities  ;  who 
healeth  all  thy  diseases"  (Ps.  ciii.  3).  Disease  of 
the  body  is  an  expressive  and  awful  representation 


292 


APOLOGETICS. 


of  the  evil  of  sin.  And  I  have  often  thought  that 
particular  diseases  ma}^  be  taken  as  furnishing  af- 
fecting pictures  of  particular  sins,  —  in  their  power, 
or  their  secrecy  and  subtlety,  or  their  rapidity,  or 
their  weakening  and  prostrating  effect,  or  their 
loathsomeness,  or  fatal  issue.  I  believe  that  He 
wdio  when  on  earth  healed  all  manner  of  disease 
demonstrated  thereb}^  that  he  can  cure  all  kinds 
of  soul  maladies.  He  who  opened  the  eyes  of  the 
blind  meant  thereby  to  show  that  he  is  able  to  open 
the  eyes  of  our  understandings  to  discern  the 
beauty  of  spiritual  things.  He  who  unstopped  the 
ears  of  the  deaf  does  still  open  the  ear  of  faith,  so 
that  it  attends  to  the  intimation  of  God's  will,  given 
in  his  Word  and  by  his  Spirit.  He  who  allayed 
the  burning  fever  does  still  assuage  the  fierce  burn- 
ings of  wrath  and  malice.  He  who  stopped  the 
issue  of  blood  is  powerful  to  stanch  the  outbursts 
of  lust  and  temper.  He  who  restored  to  soundness 
the  encrusted  and  loathsome  leper  can  make  the 
selfish  man  generous,  and  the  licentious  man  pure. 
He  who  made  the  lame  to  walk  can  rouse  .the  dis- 
abled and  impotent  from  their  lethargy,  and  make 
them  walk  and  run  in  the  way  of  God's  command- 
ments. He  who  restored  the  withered  hand  does 
still  impart  life  to  our  palsied  faculties.  He  who 
calmed  the  demoniac,  that  could  not  be  bound  by 
cords  or  chains,  can  bring  down  and  subdue  the 
man  of  raging  passion,  and  make  him  "  sit  at  his 
feet  clothed,  and  in  his  right  mind."  Other  miracles 
teach  the  same  lessons,  all  in  unison  with  his  dis- 


CHRIST- S   SUFFERIXGS.  293 

courses.  He  who  walked  on  the  sea  and  calmed 
the  agitated  waters,  is  above  all  the  powers  of  na- 
ture,, and  can  still  the  troubles  that  rage  around 
us,  so  that  there  is  a  great  calm.  He  who  fed 
the  multitudes  gives  to  his  people  '^  bread  to  eat 
of  which  the  world  knoweth  not."  He  who  raised 
the  dead  does  still  quicken  the  spiritual!}'  dead,  and 
restore  them  to  newness  of  life. 

As  he  draws  near  the  close  of  his  earthly  pil- 
grimage, he  explains  more  fully  the  nature  of  his 
mission,  and  the  way  in  which  he  was  to  accomplish 
it,  by  suffering  and  dying.  "The  Son  of  man  came 
to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost."  He  refers 
in  mysterious  language  to  the  terrible  conflict  by 
which  this  was  to  be  effected  :  "  I  have  a  baptism  to 
be  baptized  ^^ith ;  and  how  am  I  straitened  till  it  be 
accomplished."  He  shows  his  disciples  (Matt.  xvi. 
21),  "that  he  must  go  unto  Jerusalem,  and  suffer 
many  things  of  the  elders,  and  chief  priests,  and 
Scribes,  and  be  killed,  and  be  raised  again  the  third 
day."  John  xii.  27:  "  Xow  is  my  soul  troubled; 
and  what  shall  I  say?  Father,  save  me  from  this 
hour."  In  institutino-  the  m.ost  significant  and 
solemn  rite  of  our  religion,  he  points  to  his  death 
as  a  sacrifice  and  an  atonement  for  sin  :  "This  cup 
is  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood,  shed  for  many 
for  the  remission  of  sins."  In  the  grarden  he  is  "in 
agony,"  and  in  the  struggle  prays  that  the  cup  may 
pass  from  him,  adding,  "Nevertheless,  not  my  will, 
but  thine,  be  done."  On  the  cross  he  had  to  say: 
**M3'  God.  mv  God,  whv  hast  thou  forsaken  me?" 


294  APOLOGETICS. 

When  ibis  question  is  put,  no  answer  is  given. 
To  that  forsaken  son  the  Father  deigns  no  reply. 
Let  us  come  to  the  foot  of  the  cross,  and  answer, 
"  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  he  was 
bruised  for  our  iniquities." 

Science  seems  to  be  joining  with  our  felt  experi- 
ence to  show  that  our  world  has  within  deranging 
as  well  as  arranging  powers.  Later  research  has 
taught  no  lesson  so  specially  and  effectively  as  this, 
that  there  has  been  a  contest  in  our  world  from  the 
beginning,  a  war  of  elements,  a  struggle  of  races. 
It  is  seen  in  the  geological  ages,  as  an  anticipation 
of  the  deeper  struggle  in  the  historic  ages,  when 
human  beings  appear  on  the  scene  ;  and  it  becomes 
a  contest  between  man  and  man,  between  sin  and 
holiness.  And  is  this  to  go  on  for  ever,  deepening, 
widening,  as  higher  forces  appear  on  the  field,  and 
weapons  of  a  more  terrible  power  come  to  be  em- 
ployed in  the  fight?  With  a  God  looking  down 
from  above,  we  are  sure  that  this  is  not  to  be  so. 
But  what  is  there  in  our  world  to  stop  this  contest, 
and  insure  the  victory  on  the  right  side?  There  is 
no  sufficiency  in  the  physical  agencies  to  do  it. 
The  power  which  knowledge  gives  may  only  place 
new  weapons  in  the  hands  of  evil.  Nor  is  there 
any  security  that  mental  agencies  will  certainly 
accomplish  it.  For  in  this  field  passion  excites 
passion,  fire  kindles  fire,  war  breeds  w^ar,  —  as  wave 
meets  wave  the  gurgitation  is  increased.  Yet  we 
are  sure  that,  under  the  government  of  a  good  God, 
the  evil  will  at  las.t  be  put  under.     And  in  Him  who 


RECOMCILJATION  EFFECTED.  295 

was  sent  forth  in  the  fulness  of  time  we  see  how  all 
this  is  to  be  accomplished.  It  is  done  by  reaching 
the  root  of  the  evil.  It  is  done,  first,  by  the  Son 
glorifying  God.  It  is  done  in  the  work  of  the 
appointed  Reconciler,  by  whom  the  law  was  mag- 
nilied  and  made  honorable,  and  divine  justice  sat- 
isfied, while  room  was  opened  up  for  the  fullest 
manifestation  of  mercy.  It  is  done  in  the  name  and 
nature  of  those  who  had  so  dishonored  God  ;  so  that 
as  by  man  God  has  been  dishonored,  so  by  man 
God  is  now  glorified.  All  this  is  done  in  the  very 
scene  in  which  the  wickedness  of  man  had  been  so 
great ;  so  that  as  on  the  earth  God  had  been  so  dis- 
honored, on  earth  God  is  now  glorified.  This  is  ac- 
complished, secondly,  by  making  provision  through 
pardon  and  reconciliation  to  gain  the  heart  of  the 
sinner,  and  by  his  spirit  to  subdue  the  love  and 
dominion  of  sin,  and  set  men  forth  on  a  course  of 
new  obedience.  And  in  accomplishing  all  this  he 
stirs  up  intelligence,  which  lessens  the  physical 
evils  in  our  w^orld,  diminishes  the  virulence  of 
disease,  and  lengthens  the  average  life  of  mankind. 
The  inspired  writers  had  foretold  all  this,  probably 
without  seeing  the  full  meaning  of  the  language 
they  employed.  For  from  the  beginning  they  spoke 
of  seed  of  the  w^oman  who  was  to  crush  the  head  of 
the  Evil  One ;  of  a  seed  of  Abraham,  in  whom  all 
the  nations  of  the  earth  were  to  be  blessed.  And 
Paul  opens  to  us  glimpses  of  a  yet  wider  reconcilia- 
tion, in  which  all  the  warring  elements  are  to  be 
embraced:  "And  having  made  peace  through  the 


296  APOLOGETICS. 

blood  of  his  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things  to 
himself;  by  him,  I  say,  whether  they  be  things  in 
earth,  or  things  in  heaven." 

The  old  question  is  still  pertinent :  "  Whence  hath 
this  man  this  wisdom  and  these  mighty  works?  Is 
not  this  the  carpenter's  son?  Is  not  his  mother 
called  Mary?  And  his  brethren  James,  and  Joses, 
and  Simon,  and  Judas?  And  his  sisters,  are  they 
not  all  with  us?  Whence,  then,  hath  this  man  all 
these  things?"  There  can  be  but  one  satisfactory 
answer :  He  brought  them  with  him  from  heaven. 


X. 


The  Planting  of  the  Christian  Church.  —  Legendary 
AND  Mythic  Theories.  —  Accordance  of  the  Book  of 
Acts  with  Geography  and  History.  —  Coincidences 
BETWEEN  Acts  and  Paul's  Epistles.  —  Present  Posi- 
tion OF  Christianity. 

^  I  ^HERE  is,  let  me  suppose,  an  intelligent,  well 
educated  youth,  —  say  a  Hindoo  of  the  Brah 
minical  caste,  —  with  no  prepossession  for  or  against 
Christianity,  but  anxious  to  know  whether  it  has  the 
sanction  of  God.  He  knows  what  it  is  now  as 
exhibited  in  the  Books  of  the  Bible,  and  the  beliefs 
and  lives  of  Christians ;  but  he  wishes  to  ascertain 
what  is  its  origin,  — from  earth  or  from  heaven  ?  For 
this  purpose  he  goes  back  to  a  point  when  there  is 
no  dispute  about  its  being  in  existence,  about  its 
being  firmly  rooted  and  having  become  a  power  in 
the  world.  He  takes  his  stand  at  the  beginning  of 
the  second  century,  or  about  seventy,  or  between  that 
and  one  hundred  years  after  the  death  of  Christ.  He 
searches  the  history  of  the  times,  and  finds  a  number 
of  points  established  by  evidence,  which  can  be  set 
aside  only  on  principles  that  would  undermine  all 
history.  First,  he  finds  that  Christianity  was  then 
widely  spread,  had  numerous  adherents  in  the  prin- 
cipal  Greek  cities,  in  Rome,  and  in   nearly  every 

13* 


298  APOLOGETICS. 

province  of  the  Roman  Empire ;  and  that  the  mem- 
bers exhibited  certain  marked  characters,  in  par- 
ticular holding  firmly  by  their  convictions,  and 
submitting  in  consequence  to  the  bitterest  persecu- 
tions. He  will  find,  too,  that  they  claimed  Jesus  as 
the  founder  of  their  faith,  and  that  it  was  allowed  by 
all  that  this  Jesus  was  crucified  at  Jerusalem  when 
Tiberius  was  Emperor  of  Rome  and  Pontius  Pilate 
was  governor  of  Judea.  Tacitus  writing  about  seventy 
years  after  the  crucifixion,  and  speaking  of  the  fire 
which  consumed  a  large  portion  of  the  city  of  Rome 
in  the  reign  of  Nero,  —  that  is,  a  little  more  than  thirty 
years  after  our  Lord's  death,  — tells  us  that,  in  order 
to  do  away  with  the  imputation  under  which  he  lay 
of  ordering  the  city  to  be  set  on  fire,  he  threw  the 
blame  on  the  Christians.  "  To  put  an  end  to  the 
report,  he  laid  the  guilt,  and  inflicted  the  most  cruel 
punishments,  upon  a  set  of  people  w^ho  were  abhorred 
for  their  crimes,  and  called  Christians  by  the  people 
The  founder  of  that  name  was  Christ,  who  suffered 
death  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  under  his  procurator, 
Pontius  Pilate.  This  hurtful  superstition,  thus 
checked  for  a  time,  broke  out  again,  and  spread 
not  only  over  Judea,  where  the  evil  originated,  but 
through  Rome  also,  to  which  every  thing  bad  finds 
its  way,  and  in  which  it  is  practised.  Some  who 
confessed  that  they  belonged  to  the  sect  were  first 
seized;  and  afterwards,  on  their  information,  a  vast 
multitude  were  apprehended  and  convicted,  not  so 
much  of  the  crime  of  burnino^  Rome  as  of  hatred  to 
mankind.     Their  sufferings  at  their  execution  were 


EARL  2'  SPREAD   OF   THE  GOSPEL. 


299 


aggravated  by  insult  and  mockery  ;  for  some  were 
disguised  in  the  skins  of  wild  beasts  and  worried  to 
death  by  dogs,  some  were  crucified,  others  were 
wrapt  in  pitch  and  set  on  fire  when  the  day  closed, 
that  they  might  serve  to  illumine  the  night.  Nero 
lent  his  gardens  for  these  exhibitions,  and  exhibited 
at  the  same  time  a  mock  Circensian  entertainment, 
and  was  a  spectator  of  the  whole  in  the  dress  of  a 
charioteer,  sometimes  mirgling  with  the  crowed  on 
foot,  and  sometimes  viewing  the  spectacle  from  his 
car.  This  conduct  made  the  sufferers  pitied  ;  and 
though  they  were  criminals,  and  deserving  the 
severest  punishment,  yet  they  were  regarded  as 
sacrificed,  not  for  the  public  good,  but  to  gratify  the 
cruelty  of  one  man."  Suetonius,  who  lived  at  the 
same  time  with  Tacitus,  refers  to  them  in  the  same 
way  :  "The  Christians,  a  set  of  men  of  a  new  and 
evil  superstition,  were  punished."  But  the  most 
remarkable  testimony  in  their  behalf  is  given  by 
Pliny  the  Younger,  a  very  thoughtful  and  elegant 
writer,  in  what  may  be  regarded  as  an  official  letter 
to  Trajan,  his  master,  the  emperor.  In  the  year 
A.D.  112  he  is  governor  of  Pontus  and  Bithynia,  and 
he  thus  wTites  of  the  Christians,  that  they  were 
"  many  of  every  age,  and  of  both  sexes.  Nor  has  the 
contagion  prevailed  among  cities  only,  but  among 
villages  and  country  districts."  He  tells  us  that 
"  accusations,  trials,  examinations,  were  and  had 
been  going  on  against  them  in  the  provinces  over 
which  he  presided ;  that  schedules  were  delivered 
bv  anonymous  informers,  containing   the  names  of 


300  APOLOGETICS. 

persons  who  were  suspected  of  holding  or  favoring 
the  religion ;  that  in  consequence  of  these  informa- 
tions many  had  been  apprehended,  of  whom  some 
boldly  avowed  their  profession  and  died  in  the 
cause."  About  the  same  time  contemptuous  allu- 
sions were  made  to  their  sufferings  and  their  forti- 
tude or  obstinate  attachment  to  their  belief  by  the 
popular  satirists,  Juvenal  and  Martial,  and  at  a 
somewhat  later  date  by  the  philosophic  Marcus 
Aurelius.* 

These  are  testimonies  by  heathen  writers,  who  lived 
altogether  out  of  the  circle  of  the  new  religion,  who 
did  not  profess  to  understand  it,  and  who  despised  it 
in  their  ignorance,  but  whose  declarations  prove  that 
it  arose  at  a  particular  time  and  in  a  particular  way, 
and  was  extensively  known  by  the  end  of  the  first 
century.  It  can  be  proven  by  indubitable  evidence, 
and  is  admitted  on  all  hands,  that  by  that  time  the 
gospel,  coming  from  Judea  only  sixty  or  seventy 
years  before,  had  been  preached  for  a  witness  in 
nearly  every  country  of  the  wide  Roman  Empire, 
and  in  some  regions  be3'ond.  It  was  known  in  the 
palace  of  the  Ceesars,  and  had  been  proclaimed  to 
Greeks  and  barbarians,  bond  and  free.  It  had  at- 
tained a  firm  footing  in  the  great  cities,  the  centres  of 
power  and  enlightenment,  —  in  Rome,  in  Corinth,  in 
Ephesus,  in  Antioch,  in  Alexandria.  It  had  planted 
stations  in  various  parts  of  North  Africa  between 
Jigypt  and  Carthage.  In  the  West  it  had  a  hold  in 
Spain,  in  Gaul,  and  perhaps  as  far  as  Britain.     In 

*  Tacitus,  Ann:  xv.  44.  Suetonius,  Nero  c.  16.  Juvenal, 
iat.  I.   155. 


EARLY    WRITINGS.  30I 

the  East  it  was  known  in  Arabia,  in  Parthia,  some 
think  as  far  as  India.  It  had  defied  the  edicts  of 
emperors,  stood  firm  amidst  the  tumults  of  the 
people,  and  come  forth  purified  by  the  fires  of  per- 
secution. Everywhere  it  had  exerted  a  moral  influ- 
ence, so  that  a  learned  apologist,  writing  a  little 
later,  could  say  :  "  We,  who  formerly  delighted  in 
vicious  excesses,  are  now  temperate  and  chaste  ;  we, 
who  once  practised  magical  arts,  have  consecrated 
ourselves  to  the  good  and  unbegotten  ;  we,  who  once 
prized  gain  above  all  things,  give  even  what  we 
have  to  the  common  use,  and  share  it  with  such  as 
are  in  need  ;  we,  who  once  hated  and  murdered  one 
another,  who,  on  account  of  difference  of  customs, 
could  have  no  common  hearth  with  strangers,  now, 
since  the  appearance  of  Christ,  live  together  with 
them.  We  pray  for  our  enemies;  we  seek  to  per- 
suade those  who  hate  us  without  cause  to  live  con- 
formably to  the  goodly  precepts  of  Christ,  that  they 
may  become  partakers  with  us  of  the  joyful  hope  of 
blessings  from  God,  the  Lord  of  all."  * 

But  in  addition  to  this  we  have  a  whole  series  of 
writings.  We  have,  very  much  as  we  now  have 
them,  the  Four  Gospels,  with  the  connected  history 
of  the  life  of  Jesus,  of  his  parables  and  other  dis- 
courses, and  of  his  wonderful  acts  of  love.  It  is 
admitted  on  all  hands  that  between  a.d.  150  and 
A.D.  200,  the  present  Four  Gospels  were  univer- 
sally acknowledged  by  the  church  as  written  by  the 
authors  whose  names  they  bear,   and  as  of  divine 

*  Justin  Martyr.     See  Killen's  "Ancient  Church,"  p.  276. 


302  APOLOGETICS. 

authority  ;  and  that  they  were  translated  into  Latin 
and  Syriac.  But  their  general  acceptance  at  that 
time  over  all  the  scattered  churches  implies  a  long 
previous  existence.  The  First  Gospel  has  been  uni- 
versally regarded  as  written  by  Matthew,  and  ad- 
dressed specially  to  the  Hebrews.  Papias,  who  was 
Bishop  of  Hierapolis,  in  Phrygia,  the  beginning  of 
the  second  century,  is  quoted  by  Eusebius  (Hist. 
Eccl.  iii.  36)  as  referring  to  the  Gospel  by  Matthew  ; 
and  from  that  date  downward  there  is  a  chain  of 
witnesses  in  its  behalf.  We  have  like  evidence  in 
favor  of  Mark's  Gospel.  Eusebius  (iii.  39)  quotes 
from  Papias  the  testimony  of  John  the  Presbyter, 
that  Mark,  as  the  interpreter  of  Peter,  gave  an 
account  of  the  deeds  of  Jesus.  It  is  admitted  on  all 
hands  that  it  was  the  same  author  who  wrote  the 
Third  Gospel  and  the  Book  of  Acts ;  and  both 
must  have  been  published  long  before  the  end  of 
the  first  century.  Attempts  have  been  made  to 
throw  the  composition  of  John's  Gospel  down  to 
the  middle  of  the  second  century  ;  but  these  have 
utterly  failed.  Irenseus,  who  w-as  the  scholar  of 
Polycarp,  the  disciple  of  John  himself,  ascribes  the 
Gospel  to  John.  "John,  the  disciple  of  our  Lord, 
who  leaned  upon  his  bosom,  did  himself  publish  a 
Gospel  while  dwelling  at  Ephesus,  in  Asia  "  (Contra 
Ha^r.  iii.  i).  All  this  has  been  confirmed  in  our 
day  by  the  recovery  of  the  long-lost  Philosophou- 
menon  of  Hippolytus,  who  was  Bishop  of  Pontus  in 
the  first  half  of  the  third  century.  In  this  work 
Hippolytus  quotes  Basilides,  who  lived  in  the  reign 


PAUL'S  EPISTLh:^.  303 

of  Adrian,  a.d.  111-138,  and  makes  use  of  St.  John 
and  St.  Luke.  He  quotes  John  i.  9  :  "  That  was 
the  true  Light,  which  Hghteth  every  man  that  Com- 
eth into  the  world;"  and  John  ii.  4,  "Mine  hour  is 
not  yet  come." 

Then  we  have  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  I  believe 
that  by  this  time  we  have  the  whole  of  them  known 
more  or  less  throughout  the  church.  It  is  acknowl- 
edged on  all  hands  that  we  have  some  of  them, 
and  these  for  doctrinal  and  historical  purposes  the 
most  important  of  any,*at  least  thirty  years  before 
the  close  of  the  century.  These  have  stood  un- 
shaken all  the  destructive  assaults  of  modern 
German  criticism.  Baur  allows  that  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans,  the  two  Episdes  to  the  Corinth- 
ians, the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  are  genuine, 
and  were  written  by  Paul  not  long  after  the  middle 
of  the  first  century.  M.  Renan  argues  that  the 
two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  and  the  Epistle  to 
the  Philippians  are  the  works  of  the  aposde,  and 
that  it  is  probable  that  he  also  wrote  the  EpisUe  to 
the  Colossians,  and  the  characteristic  letter  to  Phil- 
emon.* I  beheve  that  the  very  same  arguments, 
—  the  sameness  in  doctrine,  in  style  of  writing,  and 
in  the  personal  characterisUcs  of  the  apostle, — 
would  prove  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  and 
the  Episdes  to  Timothy  were  written  by  Paul. 
There  are  the  same  deep  truths  underlying  them  all, 
the  same  doctrines  of  predesdnation,  election,  re- 
demption by  blood,  salvation  by  grace,  the  necessity 

*  Saint  Paul.     Introd. 


304  APOLOGETICS. 

of  regeneration,  faith,  and  holiness,  and  the  same 
ardor  of  spirit,  and  the  same  impetuosity  and  abrupt- 
ness of  style.  But  it  is  not  needful  for  my  purpose 
to  defend  the  whole  of  this  ground.  It  is  enough 
for  me  that  the  letter  to  the  metropolis  of  the  world, 
with  its  salutations  to  Christians  there ;  that  two 
letters  to  the  chief  commercial  city  of  Greece  ;  that 
letters  to  another  Grecian  city,  to  a  Macedonian 
city,  and  to  a  scattered  Celtic  people  in  the  province 
'of  Galatia,  are  allowed  to  have  been  w^rittenby  Paul 
within  less  than  an  age  of  the  death  of  Christ,  — 
within  a  shorter  time  after  the  death  of  Christ  than 
has  elapsed  since  most  of  those  now  before  me  began 
to  interest  themselves  in  public  events.  In  these 
Epistles  w^e  have  all  the  essential  truths  of  Christian- 
ity set  forth,  — the  doctrines  of  the  sinfulness  of  man, 
of  justification  by  faith,  of  the  divinity  of  our  Lord, 
of  purification  by  the  Spirit ;  we  have  glimpses  of  the 
mode  of  worship  followed  by  the  earl}'  Christians,  of 
their  churches  "in  the  house,"  of  their  prayers,  and 
the  observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ;  of  the  difii- 
culties  which  the  Gentiles  experienced  in  eating 
things  oflTered  to  idols,  and  which  the  Jews  felt  x\ 
reconcilinor  their  reverence  for  the  law  with  their 
devotion  to  the  gospel ;  we  have  notices  of  the  dis- 
putes that  were  springing  up,  of  the  predictions  of 
a  coming  apostasy ;  while  we  have  everywhere 
moral  precepts,  pure  as  the  atmosphere  of  heaven, 
and  suited  to  the  life  we  have  to  lead  on  earth  :  as 
Rom.  xii.  i  :  "I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren,  by 
the  mercies  of  God,  that  ye  present  your  bodies  a 


BOOK  OF  ACTS.  305 

living  sacrifice,  holy,  acceptable  unto  God,  which  is 
your  reasonable  service.  And  be  not  conformed  to 
this  world ;  but  be  ye  transformed  by  the  renewing 
of  your  mind;"  and  i  Cor.  xiii.  4:  "Charity  sutTer- 
eth  long,  and  is  kind ;  charity  envieth  not ;  charity 
vaunteth  not  itself,  is  not  pufted  up,  doth  not  behave 
itself  unseemly,  seeketh  not  her  own,  is  not  easily 
provoked,  thinketh  no  evil ;  rejoiceth  not  in  iniquity, 
but  rejoiceth  in  the  truth ;  beareth  all  things,  belie v- 
eth  all  things,  hopeth  all  things,  endureth  all  things." 
Besides  these,  we  have  a  very  important  history, 
professedly  by  the  same  who  wrote  the  Third  Gos- 
pel, by  one  who  travelled  with  the  apostle,  who 
introduces  himself  to  us  simply  by  changing  /le  01 
t/iey  into  we,  when  he  is  with  Paul,  as  Acts  xvi. 
10  :  "And  after  /le  had  seen  the  vision,  immediately 
lue  endeavored  to  go  into  Macedonia,  assuredly 
gathering,  that  the  Lord  had  called  us  for  to  preach 
the  gospel  unto  them.  Therefore  loosing  from  Troas,^ 
we  came  with  a  straight  course  to  Samothracia," 
&c.  ;  and  it  has  been  remarked  that  when  he  uses 
the  we,  the  narrative  is  always  fuller  and  more 
minute.  This  Book  of  Acts,  M.  Renan  shows, 
must  have  been  pubHshed  at  least  by  the  year  80 
of  our  Lord.*  I  believe  it  was  written  earlier,  as,  if 
it  had  not  been  written  before  that  time,  it  would  not 
have  left  Paul  in  his  own  hired  house  in  Rome  ; 
but  would  have  contained  an  account  of  the  tragic 
scenes  connected  with  Paul's  death.  M.  Renan 
is  sure  this  book  was  written  by  Luke,  the  phy- 

*  Les  Ap6tres,  p.  xxii. 


3o6  APOLOGETICS. 

sician,  and  contains  a  substantially  correct  account 
of  the  life  and  travels  of  Paul,  written  in  the  true 
manner  of  history,  in  a  calm,  a  charitable,  and 
truly  catholic  spirit,  and  in  accordance  with  the 
history  of  the  times. 

Such  is  the  historic  phenomenon  that  presents 
itself  at  the  opening  of  the  second  century  :  a  wide- 
spread faith  in  Jesus,  influencing  the  inner  life  and 
outward  conduct,  and,  as  is  admitted  by  their  ene- 
mies, a  pure  morality  on  the  part  of  Christians ; 
with  certain  books,  —  four  histories  of  the  most 
remarkable  man  (to  say  the  least)  that  ever  lived ; 
a  number  of  Epistles  addressed  to  Christians,  ex- 
pounding their  doctrine  and  revealing  the  inner 
springs  of  their  life  ;  and  we  have  what  seems  -prima 
facie  a  clear,  accurate,  and  consistent  account  of 
the  way  in  w^iich  all  this  was  produced.  Here 
there  is  a  phenomenon  to  be  accounted  for,  what 
will  be  acknowledged  to  be  a  very  wonderful  phe- 
nomenon, and  a  very  complex  phenomenon,  —  a  new 
life  appearing  simultaneously  in  very  different  coun- 
tries, among  Jews  and  Gentiles,  in  Rome  and  all  its 
diverse  provinces,  among  urban  and  rural  popula- 
tions, among  Greeks  and  barbarians  ;  in  and  along 
with  this  a  series  of  works,  biographies,  histories, 
expositions  of  doctrine  and  precept,  all  tending  to 
one  point.      How,  then,  are  we  to  account  for  this? 

There  is  one  way  of  accounting  for  it ;  and  that 
is  the  simple,  the  obvious  one,  that  the  books  speak 
the  truth  about  Jesus,  about  Paul  and  the  propaga- 
tion of  the  gospel.     Adopt  this  hypothesis,   and  we 


INFIDEL   HYPOTHESES.  307 

can  understand  the  whole,  —  understand  how  the 
new  life  sprang  up,  how  the  faith  was  propagated, 
how  the  doctrine  arose,  how  the  precepts  came  to 
be  so  pure.  In  scientific  investigation  men  form  an 
hj'pothesis,  and  then  inquire  whether  facts  corre- 
spond. Newton  supposed  that  all  matter  attracted 
other  matter  inversely  according  to  the  square  of 
the  distance ;  and  the  hypothesis  was  found  to  ac- 
count for  the  whole  movements  of  the  heavenly 
bodies,  which  all  became  verifications  of  what  New- 
ton supposed  to  be  the  law  of  the  solar  system.. 
Adopt  the  hypothesis  that  Jesus  was  what  he  is 
represented,  and  the  whole  of  the  books  and  the 
history  becomes  a  verification. 

Any  other  theory  that  may  be  propounded  can 
be  shown  to  be  utterly  insufficient  to  explain  the 
phenomenon,  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  body  of 
facts  taken  as  a  whole.  Let  us  look  at  some  of 
these  suppositions. 

First,  the  whole  is  a  contrivance,  an  organized 
deceit,  a  cunningly  devised  fable  of  designing  men. 
Strange  as  it  may  sound,  this  is  the  conclusion  to 
which  some  of  the  later  German  infidels  have  been 
obliged  to  come,  as  finding  that  all  other  supposi- 
tions, the  legendary  and  the  mythic,  cannot  stand  a 
sifting  examination.  Some  persons  known,  —  say 
Peter  and  John,  followed  by  Paul,  —  or  some  persons 
unknown  because  kept  out  of  sight,  deliberately 
planned. a  false  system  and  palmed  it  upon  the 
world.  This  will  be  the  conclusion  to  which  men 
will  have  to   come  in  the  end  in  regard  to  Mor- 


3o8  APOLOGETICS. 

monism ;  and  this  is  in  fact  the  last  resort  to  which 
infidels  have  been  obliged  to  betake  themselves  in 
regard  to  Christianity,  because  every  other  supposi- 
tion has  failed.  Even  Strauss,  though  leaning  mainly 
on  a  vague  mythical  hypothesis,  is  obliged  to  say  :  * 
"  The  narratives  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  especially, 
are  for  the  most  part  so  methodically  framed,  so 
carried  out  into  detail,  that,  if  they  are  not  histor- 
ical, they  can  apparently  only  be  considered  as 
conscious  and  intentional  fictions."  And  yet  how 
monstrous  the  supposition !  Scheming  men,  I 
admit,  have  studiously  started  plans  of  deceit  to 
gratify  their  pride  or  lust  or  ambition,  and  have 
obstinately  stood  by  them  when  opposed.  But  what 
motives  could  any  man  have  to  invent  a  religion 
like  that  of  Jesus,  which  requires  us  to  take  up 
our  cross,  if  we  would  follow  him?  But  I  stand 
on  yet  firmer  ground,  w^hen  I  maintain  that  it 
could  not  have  entered  into  the  heart  of  any  man 
to  conceive  a  life  and  a  morality  like  that  of 
Jesus;  to  picture  one  of  so  pure  an  aim,  and  to 
put  into  his  mouth  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  or  the 
parable  of  the  prodigal  son.  The  great  body  of 
sceptics  have  resorted  to  more  ingenious  and  plausi- 
ble suppositions. 

It  w^as  at  one  time  maintained  that  the  whole 
phenomenon  originated  in  Legends.  There  was  a 
foundation  of  fact  it  w^as  allowed  :  there  was  one 
named  Jesus  who  exercised  a  mighty  power,  first 
in   the    obscure  province  of   Galilee,  and   next   in 

*  New  Life  of  Jesus,  p.  208. 


i^JiGENDART  HYPOTHESIS.  309 

Judea ;  and  then  there  gathered  around  him  a  host 
of  stories,  which  increased  as  they  spread,  till  now 
no  critic  is  able  to  determine  what  nucleus  of  truth 
there  may  have  been  in  the  comet  to  lead  on  the  neb- 
ulous accompanying  matter.  Now  I  at  once  admit 
that  such  legends  are  found  in  all  countries,  and  that 
they  might  have  appeared  in  the  Christian  Church  ; 
in  fact  they  did  rise  to  a  most  injurious  excess  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  and  have  been  incorporated  into 
its  faith  by  the  Romish  Church.  But  then  such 
legends  have  certain  marks,  and  can  easily  be 
detected.  They  are  commonly  wavering  and 
uncertain,  and  assume  different  forms  in  different 
districts  of  country  and  in  different  ages.  The 
popular  legends  of  all  nations  have  been  full  of 
glaring  inconsistencies, — inconsistencies  in  respect 
of  time,  locality,  and  incident,  and  of  the  represen- 
tation of  character,  and  the  embodiment  of  ethical 
precept  or  religious  dogma.  Who  shall  be  so  bold 
as  to  attempt  to  bring  any  thing  like  unity  out  of 
the  legends  of  the  Indians  in  this  country ;  or  of 
King  Arthur  in  ancient  Britain  ;  or  of  the  Argo- 
nautic  expedition,  the  hunting  of  the  boar  of  Caly- 
don,  the  siege  of  Thebes,  or  the  siege  of  Troy,  in 
ancient  Greece?  If  we  have  these  fables  related 
by  only  one  writer,  there  may  be  something  like  a 
connected  narrative ;  but  when  they  are  given  us 
by  various  narrators,  the  contradictions  become 
glaring  beyond  the  possibility  of  even  an  attempted 
reconciliation.  Now  the  New  Testament  bears  on 
the  very  face  of  it  that  it  is  the  work  of  a  number 


3IO  APOLOGETICS. 

of  writers  placed  in  different  circumstances,  and 
with  different  natural  tastes,  temperaments,  and 
styles  of  composition  :  and  yet  in  their  writings  we 
have  a  most  wonderful  unity,  and  this  in  the  sub- 
jects about  which  the  popular  mind  is  most  apt  to 
be  confused,  —  a  unity  in  the  ethical  system,  in  the 
graces  of  the  Christian  character,  for  example  :  a 
unit}'  in  the  grand  religious  doctrines,  as  in  the  view 
given  of  the  Word  becoming  flesh,  and  of  sin  and 
salvation  ;  and,  above  all,  a  unity  in  the  character  of 
Jesus,  who  is  placed  in  a  great  variety  of  positions, 
and  yet  is  everywhere  one  and  the  same.  The  wisest 
opponents  of  Christianity  have  come  to  see  this,  and 
have  abandoned  the  Legendary  hypothesis  as  one 
utterly  inapplicable  to  such  connected  discourses  as 
the  parables  of  our  Lord,  and  such  well-reasoned 
compositions  as  those  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

But  another  theory  has  been  devised  and  elabo- 
rated with  imposing  skill  and  learning,  and  has 
deceived  not  a  few  scholars  ignorant  of  the  world, 
though  it  is  not  likely  to  tell  with  men  of  good  sense, 
who  have  had  much  acquaintance  with  the  motives 
which  sway  mankind.  It  is  what  is  called  the 
Mythic  Theory.  It  is  shown  that  most  nations  which 
have  risen  above  barbarism  have  been  in  the  way  of 
fashioning  myths.  These  differ  in  many  respects 
from  legends.  The  legend  has  always  a  foundation 
in  fact,  to  which,  however,  additions  have  been  made 
in  the  shape  of  new,  commonly  lively  incidents 
likely  to  strike  the  popular  fancy,  and,  as  being  easily 
remembered,  to  go  down  by  tradition  to  future  ages. 


MYTHIC   Hl'POTHESIS.  3II 

Myths  may,  or  quite  as  likely  may  not,  have  a 
foundation  of  fact.  They  originate  in  some  popular 
idea  or  belief,  which  has  somehow  or  other  come  to 
be  very  generally  entertained  ;  and  they  are  devised 
to  account  for  it,  to  justify  it,  —  in  one  word,  to  sat- 
isfy it.  A  tribe  has  grown  up  with  certain  predi- 
lections, perhaps  with  a  strong  vanity  in  a  certain 
direction,  possibly  with  a  very  determined  ambition 
to  secure  certain  coveted  possessions.  To  justify  all 
this,  a  story  is  devised  as  to  some  incident  sup- 
posed to  have  occurred  at  the  formation  of  the 
tribe  *  or  as  to  the  father  of  their  race,  and  some 
fe?^  which  he  performed,  or  some  promise  or  bless- 
ing or  inheritance  which  he  left  them.  The  story 
at  once  seiz.es  the  popular  mind :  it  so  fits  into 
the  prevalent  prepossession  and  belief,  that  it  is 
generally  accepted.  It  needs  no  evidence :  it 
recommends  itself,  and  passes  current  from  mouth 
:o  mouth,  and  at  last  may  become  embodied  in 
verse.  German  scholars  have  busily  employed 
themselves  in  showing  how  these  myths  arise ;  in 
tracing  them  in  their  earliest  shape,  and  following 
them  down  to  their  latest  forms  :  have  shown  how 
they  have  been  handed  down  from  one  generation 
to  another,  and  under  what  modifications  they  have 
migrated  from  country  to  country,  and  gone  out 
from  the  mother  country  with  a  colony  to  a  distant 
region.  As  might  have  been  expected,  there  has 
been  an  attempt  made  to  appl}^  this  Mythic  Theory 
to  explain  the  rise  of  the  gospel  faith  and  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament.    But  the  attempt,  while  it  has 


312  APOLOGETICS. 

taken  with  some  who  have  spent  most  of  their  time 
in  their  hbraries,  is  now  seen  by  all  men  of  common 
sense,  who  know  mankind,  to  be  quite  as  great  a 
failm-e  as  that  founded  on  the  Legendary  Theory. 
Give  us  an  idea  of  any  kind  widely  entertained,  and 
it  will  very  likely  generate  a  myth  to  vindicate  it. 
Let  a  people  believe  that  they  have  a  right  to  a  cer- 
tain stream,  temple,  or  country,  or  pre-eminence 
among  the  nations,  and  there  will  be  a  story  to 
justify  it  all.  With  a  deep  conviction  in  the  truth 
of  Christianity,  the  mediasvals  invented  and  cher- 
ished many  silljs  but  also  some  beautiful  tales  of  the 
saints.  If  we  could  conceive  of  the  rise  of  Christian 
faith  in  the  first  century  by  natural  means,  we  could 
conceive  that  there  might  be  myths  in  the  second  cen- 
tur}^.  According  to  the  Mythical  Theory,  a  religious 
consciousness  of  a  peculiar  character  appeared  in 
the  first  century,  beginning  at  Judea ;  and  by  the 
opening  of  the  second  century  it  had  reached  every 
province  of  the  Roman  world.  This  gave  rise  to 
myths  ;  and  these  myths  committed  to  writing  are 
the  Four  Gospels,  the  Book  of  Acts,  and  some  say 
the  Epistles  of  Paul. 

Now,  upon  this  I  would  remark,  in  the  first  place, 
that  the  most  difficult  part  of  the  complicated  phe- 
nomenon is  not  explained  by  this  hypothesis;  on 
the  contrary,  it  is  assumed.  Whence  this  religious 
consciousness,  this  new  life  so  different  from  any 
thing  that  had  appeared  before,  or  that  has  appeared 
since,  —  except,  indeed,  what  has  been  produced 
indirectly  by  Christianity  ?    Whence  this  morahty  so 


THE  RELIGIOUS   CONSCIOUSNESS,        313 

self-sacrificing,  so  pure,  so  tender?  Whence  this 
conception  of  Jesus,  —  evidently  the  foundation  of 
the  whole,  — of  his  work,  his  character,  his  aims? 
The  Jewish  mind,  so  narrow  and  so  sectarian,  was 
utterly  incapable  of  such  enlargement ;  the  subtle 
and  sensuous  Greek  was  not  susceptible  of  such 
simplicity,  of  such  spirituality;  and  the  dreamy 
Orientalist  could  not  have  imparted  such  definiteness 
and  practical  adaptedness  to  the  doctrines  and 
the  precepts.  Tlie  first  thing  to  be  explained  is 
this  consciousness,  not,  be  it  remarked,  of  one 
mind,  but  of  multitudes  embracing  Christianity,  in 
countries  widely  separated  from  each  other,  and 
gathered  out  of  all  grades  of  society.  But,  suppos- 
ing the  feeling  to  have  been  gendered,  the  second 
difficulty  is  to  show  how  it  could  produce  not  myths, 
but  such  myths, —  the  sayings  of  our  Lord,  his  dis- 
courses, his  parables,  his  acts  in  entire  conformity 
with  them  ;  the  history  of  thp  travels  of  Paul,  and 
the  Epistles  attributed  to  him.  There  is  nothing 
parallel  to  this  in  the  history  of  the  world.  They 
tell  us  that  the  founder  of  Buddhism  was  a  sincere 
man,  impressed  with  the  grossness  of  the  Brahmin- 
ical  system,  and  that  he  earnestly  labored  to  effect 
a  reformation,  and  raised  up  a  body  of  followers 
who  submitted  to  sufferings  as  great  as  the  early 
Christians.  Be  it  so,  that  the  man  was  seized  with 
a  desire  to  remove  evil,  and  that  his  comparatively 
pure  but  inane  system  kindled  an  enthusiasm  in 
himself  and  his  followers,  we  want  entirely  the 
other  elements  which  we  have  in  the  early  church  : 

14 


314  APOLOGETICS. 

we  have  no  books  like  the  Gospels,  no  narrative 
geographically  and  historically  correct  like  the  Book 
of  Acts,  no  ratiocinations  and  spiritual  appeals  like 
those  of  Paul. 

The  Mythic  Theory  is  thus  seen  to  be  utterly  in- 
adequate to  explain  the  phenomenon.  That  theory 
is  that  an  idea  gave  rise  to  a  story.  But  the  first 
difficulty  is  to  get  such  an  idea  without  the  stor3^ 
And  the  second  is  to  get  such  a  story,  so  connected, 
so  consistent,  out  of  a  floating  idea.  And  the  advo- 
cates of  the  theory  are  not  to  be  allowed  to  perpe- 
trate the  palpable  "  reasoning  in  a  circle,"  involved 
in  first  creating  the  idea  in  order  to  get  the  story, 
and  then  using  the  story  to  get  the  idea.  I  am  now 
to  call  attention  to  a  series  of  facts  and  considera- 
tions utterly  inconsistent  both  with  the  Legendary 
and  Mythic  theories. 

(i)  There  is  a  conformity  between  these  early 
books  and  the  geography  of  the  countries.  This 
is  a  very  satisfactory  point.  Legends  and  myths 
pay  little  or  no  regard  to  topographical  accuracy ._ 
There  may  be  a  general  reference  to  some  well- 
known  mountain,  or  river,  or  fountain,  or  town,  to 
give  verisimilitude  to  the  narrative,  but  this  was 
reckoned  enough  in  ages  when  there  was  no  criti- 
cism to  dispute  the  popular  belief;  and  as  to  details, 
the  inventors  were  not  at  the  trouble  to  make  their 
story  correspond  to  the  actual  state  of  things. 
Scholars  have  given  us  geographies  according  to 
Homer,  geographies  according  to  the  tale  of  the 
Argonautic  expedition ;   but  they  do  not  attempt  to 


GEOGRAPHICAL   ACCORDANCE.  315 

make  these  agree  with  the  position  of  sea  and  hind. 
Some  have  been  at  great  pains  to  discover  the  places 
mentioned  in  the  legends  of  King  Arthur,  but  have 
found  the  work  hopeless  :  there  are  half  a  dozen 
places  from  the  south  of  England  on  to  the  middle  of 
Scotland  which  claim  to  be  the  burial-place  of  Ar- 
thur's queen.  He  would  be  a  bold  man  who  should 
attempt  to  sketch  the  geography  of  the  travels  of 
Hiawatha.  But  every  place  visited  by  our  Lord  in 
his  tours  can  be  pointed  out.  Some  years  ago  the 
little  town  of  Ephraim  was  discovered  by  Robinson, 
and  settled  a  number  of  difficult  points ;  and  now  it 
is  thought  that  we  can  fix  on  the  precise  spot  where 
Capernaum  stood,  which  is  identified  by  certain  fish 
still  found  in  a  well,  and  mentioned  as  being  there 
by  Josephus. 

Then  we  have  all  seen  maps  of  the  travels  of  St. 
Paul  in  strict  accordance  with  the  geography  of  the 
countries,  and  also  with  the  narrative  of  Luke,  and 
the  occasional  allusions  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles.  Let 
us  use  as  a  guide-book  that  able  and  most  accurate 
work,  Conybeare  and  Howson's  St.  Paul,  and  it 
wall  enable  us  to  follow  the  apostle  from  city  to 
city,  from  country  to  country,  over  land  and  sea, 
from  the  time  he  enters  on  his  first  missionary  tour 
at  Antioch  in  A. d.  48,  till  he  arrives  as  a  prisoner  in 
Rome,  in  a.d.  61.  The  unchanging  state  of  things 
in  the  East,  the  sameness  of  the  roads  and  routes 
from  the  earliest  date  down  to  the  present  time,  the 
existence  of  the  old  cities,  —  it  maybe  in  a  decaying 
state,  or  in  ruins,  —  enable  us  under  such  a  guide  to 


3l6  APOLOGETICS, 

follow  Paul,  with  the  fullest  assurance  that  we  are 
treading  in  his  footsteps ;  and  we  see  that  every 
thing  confirms  the  history  of  Luke  and  the  allusions 
in  the  Epistles.  Curious  coincidences  are  ever 
casting  up  to  verify  the  whole  narrative.  At  Perga 
in  Pamphylia,  John  Mark  left  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas, not  being  willing  to  engage  in  the  work ;  and 
no  wonder,  for  Paul  and  Barnabas  as  we  learn,  not 
from  the  Acts  but  otherwise,  were  about  to  enter  on 
a  very  difficult  and  dangerous  journey  through  a 
wild  mountain  country  with  bold  precipices  and  deep 
ravines,  and  infested  by  robbers  and  wild  marauders, 
who  kept  the  peaceful  inhabitants  in  a  state  of  terror 
and  often  prevented  powerful  armies  from  passing 
through  the  region.  At  Lystra  the  people  proposed 
to  offer  sacrifice  to  Barnabas  and  Paul,  supposing 
them  to  have  been  Jupiter  and  Mercury ;  and  we 
know  from  other  quarters  that  this  region  was 
inhabited  by  an  ignorant  and  superstitious  people, 
who  had  a  tradition  among  them  that  these  two 
gods  had  appeared  to  their  forefathers  in  human 
form. 

We  can  easily  conceive  that  a  legend  or  a  myth 
might  have  arisen  about  Paul  journeying  to  Rome 
and  suffering  shipwreck.  The  persons  who  invented 
or  propagated  it  would,  however,  be  at  no  pains  to 
seek  after  a  minute  accuracy.  But  the  whole  ac- 
count given  in  Acts  is  minutely  accordant  with  the 
mode  of  travelling  at  that  time,  with  the  routes 
usually  pursued,  and  with  the  direction  of  the  winds 
at  the  season.     The  centurion  takes  a  passage  in  a 


PAUL'S    SHIPWRECK.  317 

merchant  vessel  bound  for  Adramyttum,  and  this 
vessel  touches  at  Myra,  a  seaport  in  Lycia.  There 
the  centurion  found  a  ship  which  suited  his  purpose  : 
it  was  a  ship  of  Alexandria,  bound  for  Italy,  being 
evidently  a  corn  ship  carrying  provisions  to  the 
crowded  population  in  the  centre  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  Some  years  ago  Mr.  Smith  of  Jordan 
Hill,  a  gentleman  well  acquainted  with  nautical 
affairs,  set  out  in  a  vessel  of  his  own  to  verify  the 
account  given  by  Luke ;  and  he  found  it  'to  corre- 
spond in  every  particular  with  the  prevailing  winds 
and  currents,  and  with  the  geography  of  the  Isle  of 
Malta.  Referring  to  Mr.  Smith's  book  as  giving 
particular  details,  I  must  confine  myself  to  the  ac- 
count which  he  gives  of  the  wreck  thus  summarized 
by  Dr.  Howson  :  In  the  first  place,  we  are  told  that 
they  became  aware  of  land  by  the  presence  of 
breakers,  and  yet  without  striking ;  and  at  this  point 
it  is  certain  from  the  structure  of  the  strand  that 
there  must  have  been  violent  breakers  that  night, 
with  a  north-easterly  wind.  At  this  day  the  sound- 
ings as  taken  by  Mr.  Smith  were  found  to  be  twenty 
fathoms,  and  a  little  farther  on  fifteen  fathoms.  It 
may  be  said  that  this  in  itself  is  nothing  remarkable. 
But  if  we  add  that  the  fifteen  fathoms'  depth  is  the 
direction  of  the  vessel's  drift  W.  by  N.  from  the 
twenty  fathoms'  depth,  the  coincidence  is  startling. 
Again,  the  character  of  the  coast  on  the  farther  side 
of  the  bay  is  such  that,  though  the  greater  part  of  it 
is  fronted  with  rocky  precipices,  there  are  one  or 
two  indentations  which  exhibit  the  appearance  of  a 


3.t8  APOLOGhTlCS. 

creek,  with  a  shore  described  as  a  sandy  or  pebbly 
shore.  This  spot  as  seen  from  the  vessel  would 
appear  like  a  place  between  two  seas,  and  into  it 
they  ran.  Finally,  referring  to  the  fact  of  the 
anchors  holding  during  that  terrible  night,  w^e  find 
in  the  English  Official  Sailing  Directions  that  the 
ground  in  St.  Paul's  Bay  is  so  good  that,  while  the 
cables  hold,  there  is  no  danger,  as  the  anchors  will 
never  start.  All  these  facts  seem  to  prove  that  this 
Melita  must  be  the  modern  Malta,  and  that  the  nar- 
rative of  Luke  is  in  every  respect  and  circumstan- 
tially correct. 

(2)  There  is  an  accordance  hetzveen  the  state 
of  society  and  the  history  of  the  -period  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  Book  of  Acts  and  the  Efistles 
of  Paid  upon  the  other.  There  is  no  historical 
work  of  ancient  times  which  gives  us  so  clear  and 
faithful  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  the  world  at 
the  time  as  the  Book  of  Acts ;  and  it  is  all  in 
congruity  with  the  accounts  given  otherwise.  First, 
the  Jews  are  brought  under  our  view  :  both  those 
who  were  settled  in  Jerusalem,  living  on  their  past 
glory,  and  expecting  a  future  earthly  grandeur, 
which  was  never  to  be  realized  by  them  ;  and  then 
those  who  w^ere  scattered  throughout  the  Greek 
cities,  carrying  on  various  branches  of  industry 
wiih  tenacity  and  perseverance,  but  utterly  sepa- 
rated, socially  and  religiousl3s  from  the  people 
among  whom  they  sojourned  —  as  they  thought  only 
temporarity,  and  cherishing  the  idea  of  returning 
to  their   land  to   share   in  its  coming  glories.      All 


GREEK-SPEAKING  PEOPLE.  319 

of  -  them  are  discontented  with  the  condition  in 
which  they  find  themselves,  and  are  looking  for  a 
Messiah  to  bring  in  a  better  state  of  things,  but 
with  very  different  ideas  and  expectations  as  to 
what  the  character  of  this  Deliverer  should  be,  — 
some,  indeed,  expecting  such  a  one  as  the  prophets 
described  to  work  a  moral  reformation,  but  the 
great  body  of  them  longing  for  a  mere  temporal 
prince,  or  more  commonly  expecting  the  Messiah 
to  confirm  and  consolidate  their  hard,  formal, 
and  self-righteous  sj'stem  of  religious  behefs  and 
services.  And  so  we  see  a  number  of  them 
expecting  Jesus,  and  waiting  anxiously  for  him ; 
while  the  people  as  a  whole  crucified  Christ,  and 
persecuted  his  followers  in  the  vain  thought  that 
they  would  crush  the  new  evangelical  faith  on  the 
instant  and  for  ever. 

Then  we  have  a  picture  of  the  Greek-speaking 
population  in  the  great  cities,  as  in  Antioch, 
in  Paphos,  in  Ephesus,  Athens,  and  Corinth. 
Tn  these  we  see  what  the  Greek  civilization, 
spread  by  the  conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great, 
could  accomplish.  The  great  body  of  the  people 
are  degraded,  with  no  attempt  made  by  philoso- 
phers or  scholars  to  elevate  them  :  philosophers 
are  spending  their  intellectual  power  in  sophistic 
subtleties;  the  upper  classes  have  a  sensuous,  and 
some  of  them  a  literary,  refinement,  but  as  a  whole 
they  give  themselves  up  to  pleasures,  to  games 
and  theatres,  and  worse  indulgences,  —  paiderastia 
and  association  with  hetairai  being  practised  with- 


320  APOLOGETICS. 

out  shame  and  without  remorse.  Such  a  people 
were  not  fit  to  resist  the  advancing  power  of  the 
Romans,  in  fact  fell  under  their  dominion  more 
easily  than  the  Carthaginians,  the  Germans,  the 
Gauls,  or  the  Britons  did.  This  Greek  people, 
living  in  barbarous  countries,  had  no  public  or 
patriotic  purpose  to  live  for  :  they  felt  that  it  was 
of  no  use  resisting  the  Roman  dominion,  and  in 
fact  had  no  inclination  to  make  the  effort.  Their 
old  religion  had  ver}^  much  lost  its  hold  upon  them, 
and  they  knew  of  no  better  ;  and  having  no  high  aim 
before  them,  either  for  this  life  or  the  life  to  come, 
they  thought  that  there  was  nothing  for  them  but  to 
seek  and  obtain  as  many  of  the  enjoyments  of  this 
world  as  possible.  "  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for 
to-morrow  we  die."  A  people  so  situated  and  so 
acting  must,  like  the  leaves  of  autumn,  so  different 
from  the  leaves  supported  by  fresh  sap  in  spring, 
fade  and  rot  and  disappear,  as  in  fact  all  their 
once  famous  cities  did ;  so  that  it  is  difficult,  as  to 
some  of  them,  to  find  the  places  where  they  once 
were. 

Then  w^e  have  the  Romans  establishing  a  strong 
government,  allowing  no  one  to  speak  or  act 
against  the  authority  of  Caesar  or  the  Roman 
people,  insisting  everywhere  on  obedience  and 
order,  arresting  lawlessness  wherever  it  appeared, 
and  furnishing  facilities  for  travelling,  and  thus 
allowing  commerce  and  knowledge  to  spread  with 
their  civilizing  influences ;  but,  we  have  to  add, 
seeking  in  no  way  to  improve  or  to  encourage  free- 


THE  ROMANS.  321 

dom  and  independence,  or  the  morals  or  religion 
of  the  people.  The  upper  classes  in  Rome  were 
losing  the  stern  virtues  of  their  fathers,  and  acquir- 
ing the  levities  of  the  Greeks  without  their  refine- 
ment. In  the  Herods,  —  grandfather,  fathers,  and 
children,  —  and  in  Pontius  Pilate,  and  Festus,  and 
Felix,  we  have  a  pictuie  of  the  sort  of  men  sent 
out  by  the  emperors  to  rule  the  provinces;  and 
there  was  nothing  in  the  character  of  the  soldiery 
in  a  garrison  city  to  improve  the  morals  or  refine 
the  manners  of  the  cidzens.  We  perceive  the 
upper  classes,  both  Greeks  and  Romans,  losing 
their  faith  in  the  old  supersdtions  of  their  nations  ; 
and,  in  their  anxiety  to  have  something  deeper  and 
better  to  rest  on,  betaking  themselves  to  soothsayers 
and  astrologers,  who  deceived  them  by  pretending 
to  convey  supernatural  communicadons,  and  by 
the  lying  wonders  which  they  wrought. 

Then  we  have  a  picture  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
people,  rude  and  ignorant,  with  no  systemadc  at- 
tempts to  educate  or  to  elevate  them,  dividing  their 
time  between  servile  work  and  debasing  pleas- 
ures, believing  in  their  gross  hereditary  supersti- 
tions, and  irritated  at  all  who  would  disturb  them 
in  their  beliefs  or  in  their  pracdces ;  but  some 
of  them  maintaining  an  earnestness  of  belief,  an 
honest  industry,  and  love  of  independence,  such 
as  had  very  much  disappeared  among  the  upper 
classes. 

Now  in  this  book,  as  well  as  in  general  history, 
we  find  all  these  elements,  Eastern  and  Western, 

14* 


322  APOLOGETICS. 

meeting,  mingling,  seething,  fermenting.  We  see, 
too,  a  new  chemical  power  thrown  into  this  cal- 
dron, meeting  with  opposition  from  all,  but  con- 
tending with  all,  and  in  a  sense  conquering  them 
by  making  them  take  new  forms  and  dispositions, 
the  result  of  which  is  the  formation  of  a  soil  consti- 
tuting modern  society.  For  has  not  the  modern 
European  and  American  world  been  produced  b}^ 
these  four  or  ilve  causes  :  first,  the  Greeks  giving 
refinement;  second,  the  Romans  contributing  gov- 
ernment and  order  ;  third,  the  Hebrews  spreading 
a  pure  religion  ;  with  a  popular  element  derived 
from  those  energetic  nations  which  emigrated  from 
Asia,  bringing  with  them  their  superstitions,  but  also 
their  love  of  independence  ;  and  finally  Christianity 
working  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  seeking  to  subor- 
dinate and  sanctify  them  all,  as  yet  with  only  partial 
success,  but  with  such  a  measure  of  success  as  to 
insure  a  final  triumph?  We  are  here  at  the  point, 
or  rather  the  time,  where  the  Eastern  and  Western 
worlds  meet,  where  the  ancient  world  has  reached 
its  limit,  and  the  modern  world  begins.  It  is  surely 
interesting,  and  may  be  instructive,  to  stand  at  such 
a  place,  which  we  are  enabled  to  do  by  the  simple, 
truth-like  narrative  of  Luke,  to  discover  all  these 
agencies  at  work,  to  see  the  old  leaves  fallen  or 
falling  and  putrefying,  but  dropping  in  the  midst  of 
them  a  set  of  undying  seeds  to  germinate  into  a 
new  and  better  life. 

The   instances    of    correspondence    between   the 
Book  of  Acts  and  general  history  might  be  multi- 


SPECIAL    COINCIDENCES. 


323 


plied  indefinitely.  Thus,  it  is  in  Athens  that  Paul 
is  met  b}^  the  Stoics  and  Epicureans,  who  strenu- 
ously oppose  him,  as  we  might  expect  from  the 
self-righteous  character  of  the  one  sect,  and  the 
pleasure-loving  character  of  the  other.  It  is  in 
Corinth,  known  as  a  licentious,  commercial  city,  that 
impurity  breaks  forth  in  the  church  ;  and  it  is  in 
writing  to  the  Christians  in  that  place,  so  famous 
for  its  architecture,  that  he  draws  his  imagery  from 
the  art  of  building.  It  is  among  the  Galatians,  a 
Celtic  people  with  all  the  impulses  of  their  race, 
that  we  find  so  rapid  a  change  in  public  sentiment, 
so  that,  while  at  first  they  would  have  plucked  out 
their  own  eyes  for  the  good  of  the  apostle  (who 
seems  to  have  been  troubled  with  a  weakness  of 
sight),  afterwards  they  turned  away  from  the  sim- 
plicity of  the  gospel.  The  Roman  magistrates  are 
represented  now  as  shielding  the  apostle,  and  again 
as  subjecting  him  to  penalties,  according  as  they 
believe  that  the  cause  of  order  will  thereby  be  sus- 
tained. The  persons  who  handed  down  legends  or 
invented  myths  never  troubled  themselves  to  secure 
such  consistencies.  But,  besides  these  general  cor- 
respondences, there  are  minute  coincidences  of  a 
still  more  remarkable  character.  We  can  refer 
only  to  two. 

In  his  first  missionary  tour,  Paul  comes  to  the 
town  of  Paphos,  in  the  Isle  of  Cyprus.  The  title 
given  to  the  Governor  by  Luke  agrees  most  thor- 
ouglily  with  what  we  learn  from  heathen  authority. 
The  Romans  sent  two   kinds   of  governors  to  their 


324  APOLOGETICS, 

provinces.  One  set  of  provinces  was  under  the 
senate  and  people,  and  the  governor  of  these  was 
appointed  by  lot :  he  carried  with  him  the  lictor  and 
fasces,  and  he  is  styled  proconsul,  in  Greek  dvQvnaxo^  ; 
he  had  no  military  power,  and  he  had  to  resign  at 
the  end  of  the  year.  Another  set  of  provinces  was 
under  the  emperor,  and  the  governor  was  called 
propraetor  or  dvTioTcxkrjo^^  or  legatus,  TiQeo^evrr^g  :  he 
goes  with  the  authority  of  the  emperor,  he  has  full 
military  power,  and  he  remains  during  the  pleasure 
of  the  emperor.  Now  Luke  mentions  both  these 
kinds  of  officers,  uses  the  names  of  both,  and  he 
always  applies  them  right ;  that  is,  gives  to  a  prov- 
ince the  very  officer  which  we  find  that  it  had  from 
heathen  authority.  In  our  version,  he  is  called  sim- 
ply a  deputy ;  in  the  original  it  is  dvdimdxog.  Now 
Dio  Cassius  informs  us  in  one  passage  that  the 
emperor  retained  Cyprus  as  a  province  of  his  own, 
in  w^hich  case  the  title  of  the  governor  should  not 
have  been  proconsul,  but  propraitor.  But  the  same 
historian  adds  that  Augustus  restored  Cyprus  to  the 
senate,  thus  making  the  governor  proconsul.  This 
is  confirmed  by  a  coin  found  in  Curium,  in  Cyprus, 
of  the  date  a.d.  52,  a  few  years  after  the  visit  of 
Paul,  containing  an  allusion  to  Claudius  Csesar  as 
emperor,  and  representing  the  governor  of  the  Isle 
of  Cyprus  as  a  proconsul.  So  minutely  accurate 
is  the  statement  of  Luke  as  shown  by  these  inci- 
dental notices  which  learned  research  has  brought 
to  light. 

In  his  second  missionary  tour  Paul  comes  to  Phil- 


SPECIAL    COINCIDENCES.  325 

ippi,  "a  city  of  Macedonia   and  a  colony."    Augus- 
tus, the  representative  of  the  highest   grandeur  of 
the  Roman  empire,  had  bestowed   on  this   city  the 
privileges  of  a  colonia.     A  Roman  colony  planted 
in  a  city  was  a  copy  and  a  sort  of  representative  of 
Rome  itself.     The  original  members  of  it  went  out 
from  Rome,  and  were   often  veteran    soldiers   who 
were  thus  rewarded  for  their  services.     They  set- 
tled in  the  city  with  the  pride  and  all  the  feelings 
of  Romans.     I  beheve  that  in  the  course  of  years 
others,  not  Italians,  became  amalgamated  with  them, 
and  sharers  in  their  privileges.     But  the  laws   and 
customs  of  Rome  were  there   rigidly  carried  out : 
they  had  in  their  city  the  Roman  insignia,  and  in 
the  market-place  the  laws  of  the  XII.  Tables  were 
inscribed.     The  language  of  the  men  of  office,  and 
indeed  of  the  great  body  of  the  people,  was  Latin. 
The  colony  was   regulated  by  its  own   magistrates 
named  Duumviri,  but  delighting  to  call  themselves 
Praetors,  in  Greek  otQaxfr/oi.     They  kept  up  a  direct 
dependence    on    Rome,    and    were    not   under   the 
governor  of  the  province.     The  citizens  had  all  the 
privileges  of  Roman  citizens,  such  as  freedom  from 
arrest,  and  a  right  of  appeal  to  the  emperor.     Such 
was  the  city,  partly  Greek  in  its  people,  but  event- 
ually Roman  in  its  government,  in  which  Paul  now 
found  himself.     The  treatment  which  Paul  receives 
in  this  city  is  altogether  in  accordance.     He   and 
Silas  were  dragged  into  the  dyooav,  or  Forum,   ar- 
raigned before  the  city  authorities,  uQ/ot'iag.  The  case 
came  officially  before  the  OToaxijyoi,  the  usual  trans- 


3  2.6  APOL  O  GE  TICS. 

lation  of  the  Roman  prastors.  The  charge  was 
plausibly  put :  ''  These  men,  being  Jews,  do  exceed- 
in  o-ly  trouble  our  citv.  and  teach  customs  which  are 
not  lawful  for  us  to  receive,  neither  to  observe, 
beino-  Romans."  It  was  the  ancient  law  and  custom, 
of  the  Romans  to  admit  no  foreign  religion.  The 
praetors  gave  the  Roman  order:  '^Go,  lictors,  strip 
off  their  garments  :  let  them  be  scourged."  The 
horrid  sentence  being  executed,  they  thrust  them 
into  the  inner  prison.  But  in  their  passion  and  hurry 
they  had  been  guilty  of  an  informality.  Paul  was 
a  Roman  citizen,  and  they  had  condemned  him 
without  a  trial.  Afraid  of  being  punished  them- 
selves, they  gave  orders  on  the  following  morning 
for  the  liberation  of  the  prisoners. 

(3)  There  are  a  great  many  undesigned  coinci- 
dences betvjeen  the  Book  of  Acts  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  Epistles  of  Paul  on  the  other.  B}'  ob serv- 
ing- these,  we  iret  a  most  satisfactory  evidence  of  the 
authenticity  and  truthfulness  of  both,  and  indeed 
of  the  truth  of  Christianity.  This  is  the  point  which 
has  been  taken  up  by  Paley,  in  the  most  original 
of  his  works,  the  "  Horae  Paulinse."  He  puts  the 
supposition  that  the  two,  the  fourteen  letters  and  the 
history,  were  found  for  the  tirst  time  in  the  Escurial, 
or  some  other  library,  without  any  collateral  evi- 
dence in  their  favor ;  and  he  shows  that,  from  a 
comparison  of  the  two,  we  could  reach  the  convic- 
tion that  the  letters  are  authentic,  the  narrative  in 
the  main  true,  and  the  persons  and  transactions  real. 
As  a  specimen,  we  may  notice  the  correspondence 


SPECIAL    COINCIDENCES.  327 

between  Acts  xvii.  and  xviii.  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  on  the  other. 
The  history  tells  us  that  Paul,  before  coming  to 
Thessalonica,  had  been  at  Philippi,  where  he  was 
scourged  and  put  in  prison  (Acts  xvi.).  In  writ- 
ing to  the  Thessalonians,  Paul  says  (i  Thess.  ii.  2), 
"  After  that  we  had  suffered  before,  and  were  shame- 
fully entreated,  as  ye  know,  at  Philippi."  The  his- 
tory tells  us  that  when  Paul  came  to  Thessalonica 
(Acts  xvii.  5),  "the  Jews,  which  believed  not,  took 
unto  them  certain  lewd  fellows  of  the  baser  sort,  and 
gathered  a  company,  and  set  all  the  city  in  an  up- 
roar." Paul  says  (i  Thess.  ii.  2)  :  "We  were  bold 
in  our  God  to  speak  unto  you  the  gospel  of  God 
with  much  contention;"  and  (iii.  7)  he  speaks  of 
"our  affliction  and  distress."  The  history  says  that 
when  Paul  left  Berea,  he  left  behind  him  Silas  and 
Timotheus ;  and  that,  when  he  came  to  Athens, 
he  sent  back  a  message  (Acts  xvii.  15)  that  they 
should  "  come  to  him  with  all  speed  ;  "  and  that,  as 
he  was  waiting  for  them,  his  spirit  was  stirred 
within  him,  when  he  saw  the  city  given  to  the 
worship  of  idols.  Paul  (i  Thess.  iii.  i)  speaks 
affectingly  of  his  being  left  in  Athens  alone,  without 
his  usual  associates  in  labor,  and  with  no  one  to 
support  him.  The  history  implies  that,  on  Paul 
coming  to  Corinth,  Silas  and  Timotheus  were  not 
with  him  ;  and  that,  seeking  for  congenial  fellowship, 
he  joined  himself  to  Aquila  and  Priscilla  ;  and  he 
tells  us  that  after  a  time  Silas  and  Timotheus  came 
to  him  (Acts  xviii.  5)  :  "And  when  Silas  and  Timo- 


328  APOLOGETICS. 

theus  were  come  from  Macedonia."  Paul  refers 
(i  Thess.  iii.  5)  to  his  being  so  anxious  before 
Timothy  arrived  to  learn  the  state  of  the  Thessalo- 
nians  :  "For  this  cause,  when  I  could  no  longer  for- 
bear, I  sent  to  know  your  faith,  lest  b}^  some  means 
the  tempter  have  tempted  you,  and  our  labor  be  in 
vain.  But  now,  when  Timotheus  came  from  you 
unto  us,  and  brought  us  good  tidings  of  your  faith 
and  charity,  and  that  ye  have  good  remembrance  of 
us  always,  desiring  greatly  to  see  us,  as  we  also  to 
see  you."  We  find  Timothy  and  Silvanus,  who  have 
now  arrived  in  Corinth,  joining  with  Paul  in  wa'iting 
the  Epistle  (i  Thess.  i.).  The  history  tells  us  that, 
so  far  as  Greece  was  concerned,  Paul  was  most  suc- 
cessful in  Macedonia  and  Achaia,  and  details  the 
cities  in  which  his  work  was  in  these  countries. 
The  letter-writer  says  (i  Thess.  i.  7,  8),  "Ye  were 
ensamples  to  all  that  believe  in  Macedonia  and 
Achaia.  For  from  3'ou  sounded  out  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  not  only  in  Macedonia  and  Achaia,"  &c. 
But  it  may  be  urged  that  all  this  might  have  been 
done  by  a  forger  :  that  the  history  might  have  been 
written  by  one  who  had  seen  the  Epistles,  or  the 
Epistles  by  one  who  had  seen  the  Book  of  Acts. 
To  this  there  is  a  twofold  reply.  One  is,  that  the 
coincidences  come  out  incidentally,  and  not  stu- 
diousl}'.  A  forger  would  have  made  the  corre- 
spondences prominent,  certain  to  be  seen  by  all ; 
whereas,  it  is  clear  that  neither  the  historian  nor 
letter-writer  is  seeking  to  establish  his  veracity  ;  and 
w^e  discover  that  the  one  fits  into  the  other,  only  by 


SPECIAL    COINCIDENCES.  329 

collating  passages  scattered  in  various  places,  which 
passages  are  all  natural  in  the  places  in  which  they 
are  found.  Secondly,  while  we  have  samenesses, 
we  have  also  differences  between  the  two,  —  differ- 
ences on  the  surface,  and  which  would  never  have 
been  allowed  to  remain  by  a  forger.  Thus  Paul 
tells  us  how  he  was  sustained  when  he  was  in 
Thessalonica  (i  Thess.  ii.  9),  "For  ye  remember, 
brethren,  our  labor  and  travail :  for  laboring  night 
and  day,  because  we  would  not  be  chargeable  unto 
any  of  you."  And  in  another  Epistle  (Phil.  iv.  16) 
he  tells  us  that  he  got  a  gift  from  the  Philippians, 
which,  no  doubt,  helped  him  in  his  first  residence  at 
Thessalonica.  "For  even  in  Thessalonica  ye  sent 
once  and  again  unto  my  necessity."  No  mention 
is  made  of  this  in  the  history ;  and  yet  this  is  the 
very  thing  which  a  forger  would  most  likely  have 
fixed  to  show  a  forced  correspondence.  And  even 
at  this  point  there  is  a  general  agreement,  for 
the  historian  tells  us  (Acts  xviii.  3)  that  Paul  did 
thus  labor  with  his  hands  at  Corinth.  And  there  is 
a  more  important  difference,  amounting  at  first  sight 
to  a  discrepancy,  but  turning  out  in  the  end  to  be  a 
corroboration.  Looking  to  the  First  Epistle  to  the 
Thessalonians,  it  might  seem  as  if  Timothy  had 
joined  Paul  at  Athens  (i  Thess.  iii,  i)  :  "Where- 
fore, when  we  could  no  longer  forbear,  we  thought 
it  good  to  be  left  at  Athens  alone  ;  and  sent  Timo- 
theus,  our  brother,  and  minister  of  God,  and  our 
fellow-laborer  in  the  gospel  of  Christ,  to  establish 
you,   and   to   comfort  you   concerning  your  faith." 


330  APOLOGETICS. 

From  this  it  seems  pretty  clear  that,  while  Paul  was 
at  Athens,  Timothy  had  left  Berea,  and  come  to 
him  ;  and  that,  anxious  about  the  Thessalonians,  he 
had  sent  him  back  to  Thessalonica,  with  a  message 
of  comfort  to  the  persecuted  and  distracted  Chris- 
tians there.  It  was  after  fulfilling  this  mission  that 
he  and  Silas  joined  Paul  at  Corinth.  There  is  no 
notice  of  this  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  which  there  would 
certainly  have  been,  if  a  forger  had  drawn  the  his- 
tory out  of  the  Epistles,  with  the  view  of  exhibiting 
an  ostentatious  consistency.  Still  the  statement  in 
the  Epistles  does  not  contradict  the  histor}^.  For 
the  history  makes  Paul  urgently  press  Timothy  to 
come  to  Athens  ;  and  Paul,  who  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  driven  from  Athens,  remains  there  till 
Timothy  arrives,  and  then  sends  him  to  Thessa- 
lonica, with  instructions,  no  doubt,  to  join  him  at 
Corinth,  and  bring  him  a  true  account  of  the  state 
of  the  church  at  Thessalonica.  The  two  accounts 
are  thus  perfectly  consistent ;  but  it  is  not  a  labored 
consistency,  but  a  congruity  arising  from  both  being 
genuine  and  truthful.  We  might  multiply  such 
cases,  but  it  is  unnecessary  when  they  are  found 
in  so  accessible  a  book  as  the  "  Horae  Paulinae.'' 

Let  us  view  Christianity  in  its  place  in  the  world. 
The  intelligent  Hindoo  may  very  reasonably  put  the 
question.  Has  it  accomplished  what  it  professes,  has 
it  fulfilled  its  mission?  It  may  be  allowed  that 
some  of  the  early  Christians  expected  Jesus  and  his 
religion  to   make   an   easy   conquest  of  the  world. 


CHRISTIANITY  AT  PRESENT.  331 

But  the  actual  history  of  the  church  is  in  entire 
accordance  with  the  picture  presented  by  our  Lord 
by  his  inspired  apostles.  Luke  xii.  49  :  "I  am  come 
to  send  fire  on  the  earth."  —  "Suppose  ye  that  I  am 
come  to  give  peace  on  earth?  I  tell  you,  Nay ;  but 
rather  division.  From  henceforth  there  shall  be 
five  in  one  house  divided,  three  against  two,  and  two 
against  three."  The  same  lesson  is  taught  in  several 
of  the  most  striking  of  our  Lord's  parables.  Matt.  xiii. 
24-30  :  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  likened  unto  a 
man  which  sow^ed  good  seed  in  his  field  :  but  while 
men  slept,  his  enemy  came  and  sowed  tares  among 
the  wheat,  and  went  his  way.  But  when  the  blade 
was  sprung  up,  and  brought  forth  fruit,  then  appeared 
the  tares  also."  It  is  a  picture  of  what  is  felt  in  the 
heart  of  the  Christian,  it  is  a  picture  of  what  is  found 
in  the  professing  church  of  God.  When  the  Thessa- 
lonians  misinterpreted  the  language  of  Paul's  First 
Epistle,  and  concluded  that  Christ  was  to  come  in 
triumph  immediately,  the  apostle  hastens  to  inform 
them  (2  Thess.  ii.  3)  "that  day  shall  not  come, 
except  there  come  a  falling  away  first,  and  that 
man  of  sin  be  revealed,  the  son  of  perdition."  Peter 
points  to  scoffers,  who  shall  appear  in  the  latter 
days,  advancing  the  very  objection  which  we  find 
urged  in  the  present  day,  from  the  constancy  of 
nature  (2  Pet.  iii.  3-5):  'Since  the  fathers  fell 
asleep,  all  things  continue  as  they  were  from  the 
beginning  of  the  creation."  The  last  spared  of  the 
apostles  speaks  of  it  as  being  well  known  that  Anti- 
christ was  to  come  (i  John  ii.  18)  :  "And  as  ye  have 


332  APOLOGETICS. 

heard  that  Antichrist  shall  come,  even  now  there  are 
many  Antichrists."  And  in  the  Book  of  Revelation 
there  is  a  prediction  of  an  antichristian  power  which 
shall  have  extensive  sway  for  twelve  hundred  and 
sixty  days,  a  day  for  a  year.  Every  Christian  feels 
how  truly  our  Lord  pictures  the  grace  of  God  in  the 
heart,  when  he  says  (Matt.  xiii.  33),  "The  kingdom 
of  heaven  is  like  unto  leaven,  which  a  woman  took, 
and  hid  in  three  measures  of  meal,  till  the  whole 
was  leavened."  Neander  shows,  in  his  "  History  of 
the  Church,"  that  this  is  also  a  picture  of  the  church 
at  large.  He  thus  opens  his  great  work  :  "The  his- 
tory will  show  how  a  little  leaven  cast  into  the  mass 
of  humanity  has  been  gradually  penetrating  it. 
Looking  back  on  the  period  of  eighteen  centuries,  we 
would  survey  a  process  of  development,  in  which  we 
ourselves  are  included,  —  a  process  moving  steadily 
onward,  though  not  in  a  direct  line,  but  through 
various  windings,  yet  in  the  end  furthered  by  what- 
ever has  attempted  to  arrest  its  course ;  a  process 
having  its  issue  in  eternity,  but  constantly  following 
the  same  laws,  so  that  in  the  past,  as  it  unfolds  itself 
to  our  view,  we  may  see  the  germ  of  the  future 
which  is  coming  to  meet  us."  We  are  ever  inclined 
to  say,  "Why  is  he  so  long  in  coming?  Why  tarry 
the  wheels  of  his  chariot?"  We  are  made  to  see 
that  God  is  not  slack  concerning  his  purpose,  but 
at  the  same  time  that  "  with  the  Lord  one  day  is  as 
a  thousand  years,  and  a  thousand  years  as  one 
day."  This  is  a  motto  which  might  be  placed  at 
the  head  of  every  chapter  of  the  history  of  the  geo- 


CHRISTIAN   MISSIONS.  333 

logical  epochs  :  it  is  a  truth  which  we  must  take 
along  with  us,  if  we  would  comprehend  the  solemn 
and  steady  march  of  prophecy.  The  whole  of 
palaeontology  is  a  history  of  the  struggle  of  life 
upward  from  lower  to  higher  forms,  the  weaker 
dying  out,  and  the  stronger  surviving,  and  prevail- 
ing, and  propagating  its  kind.  The  biography  of 
the  individual  Christian  exhibits  a  like  contest 
between  the  mind  and  the  members,  with  the  mind 
finally  gaining  the  victory.  The  history  of  the 
church  in  the  world  is  in  like  manner  a  record  of 
a  struggle  between  light  and  darkness,  between  love 
and  selfishness,  between  purity  and  pollution;  in 
which,  notwithstanding  many  reverses,  the  higher 
principle  is  certain  to  reign  in  the  end.  Let  us, 
before  closing,  take  a  passing  glance  at  the  present 
missionary  work  of  the  church. 

For  long  ages  did  the  Protestant  Church  decline, 
like  Jonah,  the  rebellious  prophet,  to  engage  in  the 
evangelistic  work  allotted  to  it.  It  is  only  some 
seventy  years  since  Protestants  —  it  has  to  be  said , 
to  their  disgrace  —  awoke  to  the  sense  and  duty 
of  missionary  exertion.  Some  wonder  that  so  little 
fruit  has  been  gathered,  are  astonished  that  the 
whole  world  has  not  been  already  converted  by 
the  efforts  made  ;  but  the  proper  wonder  is  that  the 
churches  were  so  long  insensible  to  their  responsi- 
bility, and  that  even  yet  so  little  has  been  done. 
Of  late  years  our  religion  has  shown  that  it  is  as 
vigorous  and  fresh  for  contest  as  when  it  first  went 
forth  to   subdue  the  world,  and  as  much  has  been 


334  APOLOGETICS. 

accomplished  as  in  the  same  period  in  the  early 
church.  Seventy  years  after  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  our  Lord,  and  the  outpouring  of  the 
Spirit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  bring  us  to  the 
death  of  the  Apostle  John  and  the  close  of  the  first 
century.  In  the  early  part  of  this  Lecture  we  had 
our  attention  called  to  what  was  done  during  that 
period  :  let  us  now  compare  with  it  what  has  been 
done  in  this  century.  At  home  an  idea  has  been 
created,  and  a  public  sentiment  been  generated  and 
propagated,  and  organizations  have  been  formed 
for  effective  operation.  Every  congregation  has 
felt  the  impulse  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  every 
Sunday  school  has  its  missionary  box,  and  contri- 
butions come  in  regularly  as  the  seasons ;  and  from 
every  part  of  our  land  young  men  and  women 
willingl}^  offer  themselves  as  missionaries  or 
teachers,  and  are  ready  to  go  to  the  forlorn  hopes 
of  the  warfare,  to  labor  in  the  most  remote  islands, 
and  among  the  most  degraded  tribes ;  while  prayers 
rise  continually  from  millions  of  people  and  tens 
of  thousands  of  congregations,  who  give  themselves 
no  rest,  and  give  God  no  rest,  till  the  promise  is 
fulfilled,  and  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  shall 
cover  the  earth  as  the  waters  do  the  channel  of  the 
deep.  A  footing  and  a  settlement  have  been 
gained  in  countries  of  which  the  apostles  never 
heard.  Rude  tongues,  without  form  and  void  of  all 
elevated  and  elevating  ideas,  have  been  licked  into 
shape,  and  rendered  capable  of  conveying  spiritual 
truth.      A   literature    of   a    hio-h     and    wholesome 


CHRISTIAN  MISSIONS.  335 

character  has  been  created  in  nations  which  pre- 
viously had  none.  The  Bible,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
has  been  translated  into  more  than  one  hundred 
and  fifty  languages ;  millions  of  tracts,  and  hun- 
dreds of  thousands  of  books,  have  been  distributed. 
An  extensive  apparatus  for  work  has  been  set  up  in 
mission-houses,  and  boarding-houses,  and  schools, 
and  printing-presses,  all  radiating  a  healthy  influ- 
ence around  them.  We  see  streaks  of  light  on  the 
mountain-tops  in  countries  on  which  it  cannot  be 
said  that  the  sun  has  yet  risen.  The  prejudices 
of  ignorance  have  been  removed  among  many  in 
whom  the  prejudices  of  the  heart  have  not  given 
way.  Superstitions  are  being  undermined  in  lands 
in  which  they  have  not  yet  fallen.  In  not  a  few 
places  the  prepossessions  or  the  fears  of  the  people 
are  in  favor  of  the  missionaries  and  of  the  message 
which  they  carry.  When  the  children  of  Israel 
entered  the  land,  after  forty  years'  sojourn  in  the 
adjoining  wilderness,  there  was  a  fear  of  them 
everywhere,  which  so  far  helped  them  in  their  con- 
quest. When  the  apostles  went  forth  to  proclaim 
the  gospel,  there  was  a  feeling  abroad  among  the 
nations  that  the  old  superstitions  were  about  to 
vanish,  and  that  a  new  and  conquering  faith  was 
to  come  out  of  these  regions ;  and  this  prepared 
men  for  listening  to  their  message.  When  the 
Reformers  made  their  attack  on  the  Romish  super- 
stitions, there  was  an  impression  that  the  cor- 
ruptions had  become  intolerable ;  and  this  removed 
obstacles  out  of  the  way  as  they  advanced.     And, 


336  APOLOGETICS. 

at  this  present  time,  there  is  in  various  countries  a 
widely  diffused  presentiment  that  the  gods  cannot 
help  themselves,  and  that  their  reign  is  drawing 
to   a   close. 

And  we  can  refer  not  only  to  this  ploughing 
and  sowing,  we  can  point  to  precious  and  sub- 
stantial fruit  gathered  in.  The  gospel  has  shown 
itself  to  be  not  dead  or  effete,  as  some  would 
wish  it,  but  possessed  of  a  living  power,  quite 
as  much  as  it  had  when  it  rose  with  Jesus  from 
the  tomb,  or  when  it  went  forth  from  the  upper 
chamber  at  Jerusalem  to  be  baptized  of  the 
Spirit.  In  a  number  of  lands,  cannibalism  and 
infanticide  and  human  sacrifices  have  been  sup- 
pressed for  ever.  In  India,  suttee  has  been 
abolished,  the  supporters  of  caste  have  been 
troubled,  and  the  rights  of  woman  asserted,  and 
a  beginning  made  in  the  way  of  elevating  her. 
Idols  have  been  thrown  down  as  Dagon  was  before 
the  Ark  of.  the  Covenant ;  and  they  preserve  as 
trophies,  in  missionary  museums,  idols  which  no 
man  will  now  worship.  The  gods  of  the  land,  the 
gods  of  the  sea,  the  gods  of  the  woods,  the  rain 
gods  and  the  storm  gods  and  disease  gods,  have 
been  made  to  give  way  before  the  one  living  and 
true  God,  who  is  now  seen  to  rule  so  beneficently 
over  the  sea  and  the  dry  land,  and  over  all  the 
powers  and  agencies  of  nature.  At  hundreds  of 
mission  stations  there  are  Christians,  many  or  few, 
scattered  like  living  seeds  among  the  people,  and 
ready  to  propagate   around  them  a  wholesome  in- 


CHRISTIAN  MISSIONS.  337 

fluence.  These  converts  may  not  be  perfect,  but 
neither  were  those  of  the  early  church,  — for  ex- 
ample, those  at  Corinth;  but  they  make  a  credible 
profession,  and  in  honesty  and  purity  and  kindness 
and  generosity  set  as  good  an  example  as  the 
members  of  our  churches  at  home.  In  parts 
of  India  and  of  Burmah  there  are  communities 
of  Christians  numbering  tens  of  thousands.  In 
India  there  are  at  least  one  hundred  thousand  boys 
taught  in  the  vernacular  schools,  and  many  others 
studying  English  in  addition  to  their  own  tongue ; 
while  thirty  thousand  girls  are  receiving  a  Christian 
education.  The  planting  of  Christianity  in  Mada- 
gascar has  thrilling  incidents,  not  surpassed  for 
the  display  of  courage  or  devotedness  by  any 
recorded  in  the  early  church ;  and  there  is  a 
reasonable  prospect  of  the  whole  inhabitants 
of  that  large  island  professing  their  faith  in 
Christianity.  Mark  what  is  reported  of  the  South 
Sea  Islands  :  "  Sixty-five  years  ago  there  was  not  a 
solitary  native  Christian  in  Polynesia  :  now  it  would 
be  difiicult  to  find  a  professed  idolater  in  those 
islands  of  Eastern  or  Central  Polynesia  where 
Christian  missionaries  have  been  established.  The 
hideous  rites  of  their  forefathers  have  ceased  to  be 
practised.  Their  heathen  legends  and  war  songs 
are  forgotten.  Their  cruel  and  desolating  tribal 
wars,  which  were  rapidly  destroying  the  popula- 
tion, appear  to  be  at  an  end.  They  are  gathered 
together  in  peaceful  village  communities.  They 
live  under   recognized   codes  of  laws.      They  are 

15 


338  APOLOGETICS, 

constructing  roads,  cultivating  their  fertile  lands, 
and  engaging  in  commerce.  On  the  return  of  the 
Sabbath  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  population 
attend  the  worship  of  God,  and  in  some  instances 
more  than  half  the  adult  population  are  recognized 
members  of  Christian  Churches.  They  educate 
their  children,  preparing  them  for  usefulness  in 
after  life," 

In  summing  up,  let  us  inquire  first  what  account 
the  plain,  thoughtful  man  would  give  of  this  world, 
after  having  passed  through  its  experience.  Per- 
haps he  will  be  disposed  to  say,  with  Robert  Burns, 
that  "  man  was  made  to  mourn  ;  "  he  will  certainly 
be  ready  to  avow  that  the  dark  lines  of  sorrow  run 
through  and  through  the  web  of  life.  Of  the  four 
great  verities  held  by  Buddhism,  which  has  had  such 
extensive  sway,  the  first  two  and  the  fundamental 
are  that  the  world  is  full  of  dissatisfaction  and  sor- 
row, and  that  this  arises  from  sin.  Our  earth  is 
not  what  any  of  us  would  wish  it  to  be,  is  not  what 
good  men  would  expect  it  to  be.  It  is  not  a  scene 
of  confusion,  for  law  is  everywhere  visible.  It  is 
not  the  product  of  chance,  nor  of  an  unknown 
power,  which  may  be  good,  or  which  may  be  evil ; 
for  we  see  traces  everywhere  of  wise  and  benefi- 
cent intention.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  such 
a  place  as  we  believe  heaven  to  be.  It  is  a  state 
out  of  which  men  may  be  taken  to  heaven,  but  it  is 
not  in  itself  a  scene  of  unbroken  beatitude  and 
unstained  purity. 


WHAT  SCIENCE   SATS.  339 

Let  us  now  ask  of  science,  of  history,  and  travel, 
what  they  make  of  it.  They  tell  us  that  they  dis- 
cover in  all  past  ages,  and  in  all  countries,  traces 
of  a  contest.  When  we  look  up  to  the  heavenly 
bodies  moving  so  orderly,  shining  so  beneficently, 
it  might  seem  as  if  our  world  were  basking  in  the 
light  of  God,  as  if  it  were  a  scene  of  beauty  and 
purity  like  the  star-lit  sky  when  not  a  cloud  is  resting 
on  it.  But  when  we  penetrate  deeper,  we  discover 
that  our  Cosmos  has  been  formed  in  ages  past  out  of 
warring  elements ;  and  we  seem  to  see  at  this  pres- 
ent time  broken-up  worlds,  the  debris  of  dread  cat- 
astrophes. There  is  evidence  that  suffering  and 
death  have  been  in  our  earth  since  sentient  life 
appeared,  and  reigning  over  those  "  who  had  not 
sinned  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgres- 
sion." The  struggle  in  the  pre-Adamite  ages  is 
an  anticipation,  perhaps  a  prefiguration,  of  the 
more  terrible  struggle  in  the  post-Adamite  period. 
In  the  time  now  present,  history  and  travel  dis- 
close ignorance  and  misery  spread  over  the  earth, 
with  destructive  wars  breaking  forth  ever  and  anon 
even  in  the  most  enlightened  nations.  And  if  you 
ask  science  what  it  can  do  to  remove  the  evils, 
it  tells  you  that  there  are  powerful  elements  for 
good  in  our  world,  in  law,  and  progressive  knowl- 
edge and  life,  and  that  new  and  higher  agencies 
have  been  introduced  to  contend  with  and  conquer 
the  baser  powers ;  but,  if  candid,  it  will  add  that, 
while  it  may  so  far  restrain,  it  cannot  subdue  the 
disease  which  lies  deep  down  in  the  depths  of  the 
human  heart. 


340  APOLOGETICS. 

Let  us  come  now  to  Scripture,  and  ask  what  it  has 
to  say.  It  announces  that,  as  the  works  came  suc- 
cessively from  God's  hand,  he  could  proclaim  them 
to  be  all  very  good.  But  it  declares  at  the  same 
time  that  a  disturbing  element  has  been  introduced. 
And  have  not  sincere  men  felt  that  in  all  this  Scrip- 
ture speaks  truly,  and  that  a  false  and  flattering 
picture  has  been  given  by  rationalism  and  sentimen- 
talism?  In  the  midst  of  the  struggle,  Christianity, 
under  the  ministration  of  the  Spirit,  appears  as  the 
latest  power  introduced  into  our  world  ;  and  we  see  it 
repelling  the  evil,  and  gathering  round  it  all  the 
better  elements  —  as  the  magnet  attracts  the  metals. 
When  it  is  received,  it  stimulates  the  faculties,  and 
calls  forth  new  ideas,  new  motives,  and  new  senti- 
ments. It  has  been  the  mother  of  all  modern  educa- 
tion. John  Knox  was  the  first  to  introduce  the 
universal  education  of  the  people  in  the  eastern 
hemisphere,  and  the  Puritans  established  it  in  the 
western  world.  The  founders  of  all  the  older  col- 
leges in  Europe  and  America  were  men  of  piety. 
Our  religion  has  fostered  all  that  is  pure  and  enno- 
bling in  the  fine  arts,  in  architecture,  painting,  and 
sculpture,  and  has  frowned  upon  the  debasing  forms 
which  appeared  in  pagan  countries.  But,  in  fulfill- 
ing its  mission,  it  meets  with  opposition,  and  has  to 
engage  in  a  terrible  conflict  with  the  powers  of  evil. 
We  see  the  battle  raging  all  around  us  in  this  city 
and  in  ever}^  city,  in  ever}'  dwelling  and  in  every 
heart.  Christianity  thus  appears  in  our  world  in 
analogy  and  in  accordance  with  all  that  has  gone 


WHAT  THE  BIBLE   SATS.  34 1 

before  —  a  new  power  to  contend  with  the  evil,  and 
overcome  it.  The  history  of  our  world  is  thus  a 
unity  from  the  commencement  to  the  present  time. 
The  representation  given  in  the  Bible  is  of  a  piece 
with  the  view  given  by  the  latest  researches  of  sci- 
ence and  of  history. 


APPENDIX. 


Art.  I.    Gaps  in  the  Theory  of  Development. 

There  is  a  floating  idea  among  many,  and  often  embodied  in  a 
very  dogmatic  assertion,  that,  given  only  bare  matter,  every  thing 
may  be  formed  out  of  it  by  a  process  of  development  accord- 
ing to  natural  law.  It  may  be  of  importance  to  show  what  are 
the  unfilled-up  hiatuses  in  this  process.  In  doing  so,  I  feel  that 
I  must  bear  in  mind  myself,  and  ask  my  opponents  to  do  the 
same,  that  it  is  not  easy,  or  rather  it  is  impossible,  for  us  to 
determine  what  are  the  properties  to  be  found  in  all  matter.  It 
may  be  assumed  that  it  has  mechanical  power,  the  power  of 
motion  in  accordance  with  the  three  laws  of  Kepler.  Has  it 
also  •  essentially  a  gravitating  power  inversely  according  to  the 
square  of  the  distance  ?  This  is  a  point  which  cannot  be  settled, 
for  it  is  not  yet  determined  whether  gravitation  is  a  simple  power 
or  the  result  of  other  powers  and  collocations.  Has  it  in  its 
very  nature  the  chemical  properties  ?  This  also  is  undecided  ; 
for  we  know  not  whether  chemical  affinities  are  original  or 
derivative,  —  say,  derived  from  other  powers  and  dispositions  of 
matter.  As  little  can  it  be  determined  whether  the  powers  of 
electricity,  magnetism,  and  galvanism,  or  of  emitting  light  and 
heat,  belong  essentially  to  all  matter.  The  doubts  and  uncer- 
tainties on  these  points  should  lay  an  arrest  on  those  who  would 
dogmatize  on  the  subject  of  development  out  of  matter.  Mean- 
while it  is  certain  that,  at  the  present  stage  of  science,  there  are 
processes  which  no  man  of  science  can  perform,  and  which  we 
do  not  see  performed  in  the  laboratory  of  nature,  either  in  the 
geological  or  historical  ages. 


344  APPENDIX. 

1.  Chemical  action  cannot  be  produced  by  mechanical  power. 

2.  Life,  even  in  the  lowest  forms,  cannot  be  produced  from 
unorganized  matter.  Since  Lecture  L  {supra,  pp.  27,  28)  was  de- 
livered. Dr.  Frankland  has  published  the  results  of  experiments 
on  solutions  sealed  up  in  vacuous  tubes  and  exposed  to  a  tem- 
perature from  155°  to  160°  C,  great  care  being  taken  to  exclude 
organic  seeds  from  the  tubes.  The  liquid  in  the  tubes  became 
more  or  less  turbid  ;  but  "  there  was  not  the  slightest  evidence 
of  life  in  any  of  the  particles."     See  "Nature,"  Jan.  19,  1871. 

3.  Protoplasm  can  be  produced  only  by  living  matter. 

4.  Organized  matter  is  made  up  of  cells,  and  can  be  produced 
only  by  cells.     Whence  the  first  cell  ? 

5.  A  living  being  can  be  produced  only  from  a  seed  or  germ. 
Whence  the  first  vegetable  seed  ? 

6.  An  animal  cannot  be  produced  from  a  plant.  Whence  the 
first  animal  '^. 

7.  Sensation  cannot  be  produced  in  insentient  matter. 

8.  The  genesis  of  a  new  species  of  plant  or  animal  has  never 
come  under  the  cognizance  of  man,  either  in  pre-human  or  post- 
human  ages,  either  in  pre-scientific  or  scientific  time.  Darwin 
acknowledges  this,  and  says  that,  should  a  new  species  suddenly 
arise,  we  have  no  means  of  knowing  that  it  is  such.  (As  to  the 
Darwinian  Theory,  see  Lect.  11.  and  infra,  Art.  II.) 

9.  Consciousness  —  that  is,  a  knowledge  of  self  and  its  opera- 
tions —  cannot  be  produced  out  of  mere  matter  or  sensation. 

10.  We  have  no  knowledge  of  man  being  generated  out  of 
the  lower  animals.     (See  infra.  Art.  II.) 

11.  All  human  beings,  even  savages  {supra,  pp.  48,  138  ;  infra^ 
Art.  II.),  are  capable  of  forming  certain  high  ideas,  such  as 
those  of  God  and  duty.  The  brute  creatures  cannot  be  made 
to  entertain  these,  by  any  training. 

With  such  tremendous  gaps  in  the  process,  the  theory  w^hich 
would  derive  all  things  out  of  matter  by  development  is  seen  to 
be  a  very  precarious  one.  I  may  add  that  development  is  in  all 
cases  a  very  complex  process,  implying  a  vast  variety  of  agen- 
cies, —  mechanical,  chemical,  probably  vital,  —  adjusted  to  one 
another  and  the  surrounding  medium.  The  evolution-school 
ridicule  those  who  would  explain    the  operations  of  water  by 


GAPS  IN  DEVELOPMENT    THE  OR  T.         345 

"  aquosity,"  comparing  it  to  Martinus  Scriblerus'  method  of  ac- 
counting for  the  operation-  of  the  meat-jack  by  its  inherent 
"meat-roasting  quahty."  But  this  is  the  very  error  into  which 
they  themselves  fall  when  they  account  for  development  by  the 
"  development  capacity."  The  present  business  of  physiolo- 
gists is  not  to  rest  satisfied  with  the  power  of  development,  or 
the  law  of  hereditary  descent,  but  to  seek  to  determine  what 
are  the  separate  powers  and  collocations  involved  in  the  process. 
In  such  investigations  they  need  to  attend,  as  Bacon  recom- 
mended, to  the  "necessary  rejections  and  exclusions,"  or,  as 
Whewell  expresses  it,  "  to  the  decomposition  of  facts." 

Some,  I  find,  are  now  calling  in  a  power  of  Pangenesis  com- 
mon to  all  matter.  I  do  not  deny,  a  priori,  the  existence  of 
such  a  power :  some  very  profound  minds,  penetrated  with 
religion,  such  as  Leibnitz,  have  been  inchned  to  beheve  in  it. 
I  am  ready  to  accept  it  as  soon  as  it  can  be  scientifically  shown 
to  exist,  and  something  has  been  determined  as  to  its  nature. 
Of  this  I  am  pretty  sure,  that,  if  there  be  such  an  endowment, 
it  must  be  a  very  complicated  one,  implying  a  correlation  of 
properties. 

I  am  inclined  to  beheve  that  all  the  phenomena  referred  to 
in  this  article  —  such  as  development,  production  of  hfe  — 
have  appeared  according  to  law,  in  the  loose  sense  of  the  term ; 
that  is,  according  to  an  order  of  some  kind.  I  hold  this  in 
analogy  with  the  whole  method  of  Divine  procedure  in  nature. 
It  is  very  probable  that,  in  many  of  the  operations,  there  may 
have  been  secondary  agencies  acting  as  physical  causes.  But 
these  secondary  agencies  are,  at  the  present  stage  of  science, 
unknown :  even  the  agencies  which  produce  development  and 
heredity  are  very  much  unknown.  In  arguing,  in  these  Lectures, 
for  prevailing  final  cause,  my  appeal  is  not  to  the  unknown,  but 
the  known,  the  traces  of  adaptation  in  every  part  of  nature  ;  and 
I  cannot  allow  those  who  oppose  me  to  appeal  to  the  unknown, 
when  the  known  is  all  in  my  favor.  Science  may  be  able  to 
fill  up  some  of  the  gaps  ;  but  when  it  has  done  so,  I  am  sure, 
according  to  the  whole  analogy  of  nature,  that,  in  the  process, 
we  will  be  able  to  discover  final  cause,  or  an  adaptation  of  means 
to  accomplish  an  end. 

15* 


346  APPENDIX. 


Art.  II.     Darwin's  Descent  of  Man. 

When  Mr.  Darwin  published  his  "  Origin  of  Species,"  he  at 
once  gained  as  adherents  to  his  theory  a  large  number  of  young 
naturalists.  His  extensive  and  accurate  acquaintance  with  all 
departments  of  Natural  History,  the  pains  taken  by  him  in  the 
collection  of  facts,  and  the  simple  and  ingenious  way  in  which 
he  stated  them,  prepared  men  to  listen  to  him  ;  and,  as  they  did 
so,  they  found  he  was  able  by  Natural  Selection  to  account  for  a 
number  of  phenomena  which  could  not  otherwise  be  explained. 
But  of  late  there  has  appeared  a  disposition,  even  among  those 
who  were  at  first  taken  with  the  theory,  carefully  to  review  it. 
All  candid  minds  admit  that  it  explains  much,  that  it  explains 
modifications  which  plants  and  animals  undergo  from  age  to 
age ;  but  many  doubt  whether  it  accounts  for  every  thing, 
whether  indeed  there  is  not  a  profounder  set  of  facts  which  it 
does  not  reach. 

Mr.  Darwin  is  candid  enough  to  admit  that  he  cannot  account 
for  every  thing  connected  with  the  appearance  of  vegetable  and 
animal  life.  In  his  fifth  edition  (1869),  he  speaks  "of  life,  with 
its  several  powers,  having  been  originally  breathed  by  the  Cre- 
ator into  a  few  forms  or  into  one."  We  have  seen  {supra,  p.  80) 
that  he  allows  :  "  How  a  nerve  comes  to  be  sensitive  to  light 
hardly  concerns  us  more  than  how  life  itself  first  originated." 
But  if  Natural  Selection  cannot  explain  the  origin  of  life^  the 
origin  of  nerve-force  or  sensation,  it  is  clear  that  there  is  a 
power  above  and  beyond  it,  which  operated  when  life  appeared, 
and  when  sensation  appeared,  and  which  may  have  operated  on 
other  occasions  in  producing  higher  and  ever  higher  forms  of 
living  beings. 

It  has  been  known,  since  at  least  the  time  of  Aristotle,  that 
there  is  a  striking  analogy  between  man  and  the  lower  animals, 
between  all  the  tribes  of  animals,  and  between  animals  and 
plants  ;  and  Mr.  Darwin  has,  by  an  accumulation  of  facts,  first 
in  the  "  Origin  of  Species,"  and  now  in  the  "  Descent  of  Man," 
illustrated  this  point  more  fully  than  was  ever  done  before.  But 
it  does  not  therefore  follow  that  the  animal  is  evolved  from  the 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT   OF  MAN.  347 

plant,  and  man  from  the  lower  animals.  The  paintings  of  Titian 
have  all  a  certain  character,  which  shows  that  they  are  the  prod- 
ucts of  the  same  great  artist.  So  the  correspondences  in  nat- 
ure, inanimate  and  animate,  show  that  the  whole  proceeds  from 
one  grand  Designing  Mind.  We  know  how  the  great  painter 
accomplished  his  aim,  by  brush  and  colors  and  canvas.  We 
see  some  of  the  means  by  which  God  effects  his  infinitely  grander 
ends.  We  see  that  one  of  these  is  the  beneficent  law  of  Natural 
Selection,  whereby  the  weak,  after  enjoying  their  brief  existence, 
expire  without  leaving  seed,  whereas  the  strong  survive  and 
leave  a  strong  progeny.  But  the  latest  science  cannot  tell  how 
Life  arises,  or  Sensation,  or  Consciousness,  or  IntelHgence,  or 
Moral  Discernment.  Even  with  Mr.  Darwin's  accumulation  of 
facts  bearing  on  the  modification  of  species,  we  are  made  to  feel 
that  there  are  residual  phenomena  left,  which  his  theory  does 
not  explain,  and  which  he  does  not  profess  or  affect  to  explain,  — 
in  the  appearance,  for  example,  of  the  first  plant  or  the  first  sen- 
tient creature.  In  the  edition  of  the  "  Origin  of  Species " 
issued  in  1869,  though  he  still  stands  up  for  Natural  Selection 
as  the  most  important  means  of  producing  modification,  he 
allows  that  it  is  not  the  only  one.  And  in  his  "  Animals  and 
Plants  under  Domestication  "  (vol.  ii.  p.  403),  he  calls  in  a  new 
theory,  that  of  Pangenesis,  according  to  which  every  living  creat- 
ure possesses  innumerable  minute  atoms  named  "  gemmules," 
which  are  generated  in  every  part  of  the  body,  are  constantly 
moving,  and  have  the  power  of  reproduction,  and  in  particular 
are  collected  in  the  generative  organs,  coming  thither  from  every 
part  of  the  body.  "  These  almost  infinitely  numerous  and  minute 
gemmules  must  be  included  in  each  bud,  ovule,  spermatozoon, 
and  pollen  grain  "  (p.  366).  It  has  been  generally  felt,  even  by 
those  inclined  to  follow  Mr.  Darwin,  that  this  hypothesis  is 
exceedingly  vague  and  confused  and  complicated.  It  has  cer- 
tainly no  direct  evidence  in  its  favor,  as  these  gemmules  have 
never  come  under  the  eye  of  science.  The  circumstance  that 
Mr.  Darwin  has  been  obliged  to  resort  to  such  hypothesis  is  a 
proof  that  he  feels  that  there  is  a  residuum  which  his  favorite 
principle  of  Natural  Selection  cannot  reach. 

Whence,  then,  this  element,  which  we  ever  come  to  when  we 


348  APPENDIX. 

go  far  enough  back,  when  we  dig  sufficiently  far  down  ?  The 
older  naturalists  called  it  the  "vital  principle,"  not  thereby 
meaning  to  explain  it,  but  to  show  merely  that  they  had  come  to 
an  ultimate  fact,  for  which  they  had  to  provide  a  name.  Our 
younger  naturalists  do  not  know  well  what  to  make  of  it.  Some 
of  the  more  superficial  of  them  would  deny  its  existence,  and 
explain  all  by  molecular  motion.  But  the  profounder  investiga- 
tors feel  that  they  are  ever  coming  to  it,  and  call  it  by  the  name 
of  Pangenesis,  or  (with  Herbert  Spencer)  "physiological  units," 
each  with  an  innate  power  to  build  up  and  reproduce  the  organ- 
ism. I  do  believe  that  this  vital  power,  whatever  it  be,  has  its 
laws  ;  and  science  is  engaged  in  its  proper  work  when  it  is  seek- 
ing to  discover  them,  and  may  sooner  or  later  be  rewarded  with 
success.  And  of  this  we  may  be  assured,  that  when  the  dis- 
covery is  made  the  wonder  of  intelligent  minds  will  not  be 
diminished. 

Whence  this  element  is  still  the  question  ?  It  is  at  least  pos- 
sible and  conceivable  that  it  may  have  been  introduced  by  an 
immediate  fiat  of  the  Great  First  Cause,  continuing  to  act  as  a 
cause,  and  producing,  as  the  aeons  roll  on,  new  germs  ready  to 
rise  to  living  beings,  or  living  beings  ready  to  bring  forth  germs  ; 
and  we  may  be  sure-  that  what  God  thus  places  in  our  world  will 
fit  into  all  that  has  gone  before,  and  become  intertwined  with  it, 
and  act  in  unison  with  it.  But  it  is  quite  as  possible  that  all 
this  may  be  effected  hy  some  secondary  agency,  at  present  un- 
known, and  which  may  or  may  not  become  known.  The  whole 
analogy  of  the  Divine  procedure,  and  the  beautiful  correspond- 
ence between  the  old  and  the  new,  seem  to  point  to  some  com- 
mon causation  producing  the  first  life  and  all  succeeding  hfe. 
This  agency,  which  hke  development  is  only  a  mode  of  the 
Divine  agency,  may  have  produced  the  first  hfe,  the  first  species, 
every  subsequent  species,  all  according  to  a  Divine  plan.  It  is 
not  the  development  theory  :  it  goes  farther  back,  and  shows 
that  behind  the  development  there  is  a  power  which  produced 
the  life  developed,  and  is  involved  in  the  "development,  —  the 
powers  working  in  which,  naturalists  do  not  profess  to  be  able 
to  explain. 

The  development  theory  is  largely  an  appeal  to  the  unknown. 


BAR  WIN'S  DESCENT   OF  MAN.  349 

No  one  supposes  that  evolution  is  an  evolution  from  nothing. 
\t  is  a  law  of  intuitive  intelligence,  confirmed  by  all  experience, 
that  every  production  has  a  cause,  and  that  there  must  be  power 
in  the  agents  acting  as  the  cause  to  produce  the  effect.  That 
which  is  evolved  always  implies  a  potency  in  that  in  which  it  is 
involved.  A  plant  or  animal  with  the  power  of  development  is 
always  a  product  of  previous  causes,  and  is  a  cause  of  coming 
effects.  But  no  one  professes  to  be  able  to  specify  what  are  the 
powers  involved  in  development.  These  powers,  if  we  could 
discover  and  separate  them,  might  be  found,  at  least  one  or  more 
of  them,  to  be  intimately  connected  with,  and  indeed  to  proceed 
from,  the  power,  whatever  it  is,  which  originates  Hfe,  —  to  be  a 
prolongation  in  fact  of  that  Hfe  ;  the  prolongation  being  implied 
in  the  evolution,  so  that,  if  there  were  not  a  continuance  and  a 
transmission  of  it,  there  would  be  no  development.  There  is 
certainly  an  element  somewhere  which  gives  constant  notice  of 
its  existence,  but  has  hitherto  afforded  little  insight  into  its 
nature,  or  the  laws  which  it  obeys. 

It  is  doubted  whether  the  law  of  Natural  Selection,  as  unfolded 
by  Darwin,  can  explain  the  modifications  of  plants  and  animals. 
Mr.  St.  George  Mivart,  in  his  work  on  the  "  Genesis  of  Species," 
has  endeavored  to  show  :  (i)  that  Natural  Selection  is  incom- 
petent to  account  for  the  incipient  stages  of  useful  structures  ; 
(2)  that  it  does  not  harmonize  with  the  co-existence  of  closely 
similar  structures  of  diverse  origin  ;  (3)  that  there  are  grounds 
for  thinking  that  specific  differences  may  be  developed  suddenly 
instead  of  gradually;  (4)  that  the  opinion  that  species  have 
definite  though  very  different  limits  to  their  variability  is  still 
tenable  ;  (5)  that  certain  fossil  transitional  forms  are  absent, 
which  might  have  been  expected  to  be  present ;  (6)  that  some 
facts  of  geographical  distribution  supplement  other  difficulties  ; 
(7)  that  the  objection  drawn  from  the  physiological  difference 
between  species  and  races  still  exists  unrefuted  ;  (8)  that  there 
are  many  remarkable  phenomena  in  organic  forms  upon  which 
Natural  Selection  throws  no  light  whatever,  but  the  explanations 
of  which,  if  they  could  be  obtained,  might  throw  light  upon 
specific  origination.  I  am  far  from  saying  that  some  of  these 
formidable  objections,  supported  as  they  are  by  an  array  of  facts 


350  APPENDIX, 

by  an  accomplished  naturalist,  may  not  be  answered.  But  this 
is  certain,  that  for  years,  perhaps  for  ages  to  come,  it  will  be  an 
unsettled  question  whether  Natural  Selection  can  account  for 
all  the  ordinary  phenomena  of  the  modification  of  organisms. 

In  his  latest  work  Mr.  Darwin  has  employed  his  theory  to 
account  for  the  origin  of  man.  In  order  to  be  able  to  judge  of 
the  success  of  the  attempt,  it  may  be  proper  to  state  briefly 
the  conclusions  which  he  reaches.  Man  is  descended  from  the 
Simiad^  :  "  This  family  is  divided,  by  almost  all  naturalists,  into 
the  Catarhine,  or  Old  World  monkeys,  all  of  which  are  charac- 
terized (as  their  name  expresses)  by  the  pecuhar  structure  of 
their  nostrils,  and  by  having  four  premolars  in  each  jaw  ;  and 
into  Platyrhine  group,  or  New  World  monkeys  (including  two 
very  distinct  sub-groups),  all  of  which  are  characterized  by  dif- 
ferently constructed  nostrils,  and  by  having  six  premolars  in  each 
jaw.  Some  other  small  differences  might  be  mentioned.  Now 
man  unquestionably  belongs  in  his  dentition,  in  the  structure  of 
his  nostrils,  and  some  other  respects,  to  the  Catarhine,  or  Old 
World  division ;  nor  does  he  resemble  the  Platyrhines  more 
closely  than  the  Catarhines  in  any  characters,  excepting  in  a  few 
of  not  much  importance,  and  apparently  of  an  adaptive  charac- 
ter. Therefore  it  would  be  against  all  probability  to  suppose 
that  some  ancient  New  World  species  had  varied,  and  had  thus 
produced  a  man-like  creature,  with  all  the  distinctive  characters 
proper  to  the  Old  World  division,  losing  at  the  same  time  all  its 
Own  distinctive  characters.  There  can  consequently  hardly  be 
a  doubt  that  man  is  an  off-shoot  from  the  Old  World  Simian 
stem  ;  and  that,  under  a  genealogical  point  of  view,  he  must  be 
classed  with  the  Catarhine  division  "  (Descent  of  Man,  Part  I. 
c.  vi.,  British  edition,  1871).  As  man  agrees  with  anthropomor- 
phous apes,  "  not  only  in  those  characters  which  he  possesses 
in  common  with  the  whole  Catarhine  group,  but  in  other  peculiar 
characters,  such  as  the  absence  of  a  tail,  and  of  cahosities,  and 
in  general  appearance,  we  may  infer  that  some  ancient  member 
of  the  anthropomorphous  sub-group  gave  birth  to  man."  "It 
is  probable  that  Africa  was  formerly  inhabited  by  extinct  apes 
closely  allied  to  the  gorilla  and  chimpanzee  ;  and  as  these  two 
species  are  now  man's  nearest  aUies,  it  is  somewhat  more  prob- 


BAR  WIN'S  DESCENT  OF  MAN. 


351 


able  that  our  early  progenitors  lived  on  the  African  continent 
than  elsewhere."  "  We  do  not  know  whether  man  is  descended 
from  some  comparatively  small  species  like  the  chimpanzee,  or 
from  one  as  powerful  as  the  gorilla."  He  can  tell  us  that  "the 
ape-like  progenitors  of  man  probably  lived  in  society ;  "  that 
"  the  early  progenitors  of  man  were  no  doubt  inferior  in  intel- 
lect, and  probably  in  social  disposition,  to  the  lowest  existing 
savages  ; "  that  "  the  early  progenitors  of  man  were  no 
doubt  once  covered  with  hair,  both  sexes  having  beards  ;  "  that 
"  their  ears  were  pointed  and  capable  of  movement  ;  "  and  that 
"  their  bodies  were  provided  with  a  tail,  having  the  proper 
muscles." 

Mr.  Darwin  can  carry  our  genealogy  still  farther  back  :  "  Man 
is  descended  from  a  hairy  quadruped,  furnished  with  a  tail  and 
pointed  ears,  probably  arboreal  in  its  habits,  and  an  inhabitant 
of  the  Old  World.  This  creature,  if  its  whole  structure  had 
been  examined  by  a  naturalist,  would  have  been  classed  amongst 
the  Ouadrumana,  as  surely  as  would  the  common,  and  still  more 
ancient,  progenitor  of  the  Old  and  New  World  monkeys.  The 
Ouadrumana  and  all  the  higher  mammals  are  probably  derived 
from  an  ancient  marsupial  animal;  and  this,  through  a  long  line 
of  diversified  forms,  either  from  some  reptile-Hke  or  some 
amphibian-like  creature,  and  this  again  from  some  fish-like 
animal.  In  the  dim  obscurity  of  the  past  we  can  see  that  tlie 
early  progenitor  of  all  the  vertebrata  must  have  been  an  aquatic 
animal,  provided  with  branchiae,  with  the  two  sexes  united  in  the 
same  individual,  and  with  the  most  important  organs  of  the  body 
(such  as  the  brain  and  heart)  imperfectly  developed.  This 
animal  seems  to  have  been  more  like  the  larvae  of  our  existing 
marine  Ascidians  than  any  other  form  known.  "  (Part  II.  c.  xxi.) 

I  have  allowed  Mr.  Darwin  to  draw  the  picture.  I  confess  I 
shrink  from  it.  I  am  inclined  to  urge  that  the  very  circumstance 
that  man  has  a  consciousness  of  a  something  within,  which 
separates  him  from  the  brutes,  that  he  claims  to  have  a  higher 
origin,  is  a  consideration  of  some  value  in  determining  the 
question.  Man's  very  feehng  is  a  presumption  in  favor  of  his 
having  a  noble  lineage.  But  it  will  be  necessary  to  examine  the 
logical  connections  of  the  theory. 


352 


APPENDIX. 


Mr.  Darwin's  theory  as  to  man's  origin  leans  very  much  on 
his  general  theory  as  to  the  origin  of  species.  Those  who  doubt 
of  the  success  of  his  attempt  to  explain  the  origin  of  animal  spe- 
cies will  have  greater  doubts  of  his  being  able  to  account  for  the 
origin  of  man.  There  are  persons  favorably  disposed  towards 
the  theory,  as  applied  to  the  lower  animals,  who  are  not  pre- 
pared to  allow  that  it  can  explain  the  production  of  a  being  with 
a  responsible  and  immortal  soul.  It  is  acknowledged  on  all 
hands  that  Natural  Selection  cannot  account  for  the  origin  of 
life  ;  and  the  power  beyond,  which  produced  life,  may  have  found 
a  fitting  and  worthy  occasion  for  a  farther  operation  in  producing 
man.  The  difiiculty  which  there  is  in  applying  it  to  man's  intel- 
lectual and  moral  nature  is  making  some  doubt  of  the  whole 
theory,  as  capable  of  explaining  all  the  phenomena  even  of 
vegetable  and  animal  modifications. 

Again,  there  are  acknowledged  to  be  wide  gaps  in  the  trans- 
mission, to  be  many  breaks  in  the  genealogy.  Thus  Mr.  Darwin 
acknowledges  that  he  cannot  account  for  the  appearance  of  the 
mental  powers  in  animals.  "  In  what  manner  the  mental  powers 
were  first  developed  in  the  lowest  organisms  is  as  hopeless  an 
inquiry  as  how  life  first  originated.  These  are  problems  for  the 
distant- future,  if  they  are  ever  to  be  solved  by  man."  (Part  I. 
c.  ii.)  Some  of  us  wish  that  he  had  used  the  same  guarded 
language  as  to  the  origin  of  man's  mental  powers  as  he  has 
used  in  regard  to  that  of  the  lower  organisms.  It  is  clear  that 
Natural  Selection  cannot  explain  every  thing,  and  the  production 
of  man  may  be  one  of  the  things  which  are  beyond  its  reach. 
We  are  ever  coming  in  sight  of  a  higher  power ;  we  need  it  to 
produce  life,  we  need  it  to  produce  the  instincts  of  animals,  and 
a  fortiori  we  need  it  to  account  for  the  rational  and  moral  en- 
dowments. All  analogy  constrains  me  to  cling  to  the  idea  that 
the  same  power  of  God,  whether  acting  directly  or  by  secondary 
agency,  which  produced  life  at  first  and  endowed  the  lower 
creatures  with  psychical  properties,  has  also  been  employed  in 
creating  man  and  furnishing  him  with  his  lofty  attributes. 

He  acknowledges  that  there  are  breaks,  which  he  cannot  fill 
up,  "between  man  and  the  higher  apes  "  (vol.  i.  p.  187) ;  and  he 
speaks  more  expressly  (p.  200)  of  "  the  great  break  in  the  organic 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT  OF  MAN.  353 

chain  between  man  and  his  nearest  alh'es,  which  cannot  be  bridged 
over  by  any  extinct  or  living  species."  This  means  that  the  ani- 
mal, which  could  have  given  birth  to  man,  has  not  been  found 
in  the  geological  ages,  and  has  not  been  seen  in  historical  times, 
and  is  not  now — so  far  as  is  known  —  on  the  face  of  the  earth, 
This  is  surely  a  great  want  in  a  science  which  professes  to  be 
built  on  facts.  In  the  lack  of  facts,  he  falls  back  on  "  the  gen- 
eral principle  of  evolution  "  (p.  200).  I  admit  the  existence  of 
evolution  ;  but  I  oppose  the  theory  that  would  account  for  every 
production  by  evolution,  and,  in  the  absence  of  facts,  I  cannot 
allow  him  to  appeal  to  a  principle  which,  in  its  exclusiveness, 
cannot  be  established  without  the  facts.  But  he  tells  us  that  "  we 
have  every  reason  to  believe  that  breaks  in  the  series  are  simply 
the  results  of  so  many  forms  having  become  extinct"  (p.  187). 
But  surely  it  would  only  be  becoming  to  be  less  sure  and  dog- 
matic, till  these  forms  cast  up,  or  till  we  can  find  a  monkey  on 
the  earth  capable  by  domestication,  or  otherwise,  of  producing 
a  man. 

Farther,  if  we  have  evidence  otherwise  of  man  coming  into 
existence  by  a  special  act  of  God,  there  is  not  sufficient  scientific 
strength  in  the  Darwinian  theory  to  overturn  it.  Now  many 
believe  that  the  Scriptures,  while  they  say  little  or  nothing  as  to 
the  origin  of  animal  species,  settle  the  question  of  man's  origin. 
We  have  seen  {supra,  Lecture  II.)  that  the  book  of  Genesis  has 
anticipated  geology  by  three  thousand  years,  in  telling  of  the 
successive  stages  of  the  production  of  matter  and  animated 
beings  ;  and  it  may  well  be  attended  to  in  speaking  of  the  origin 
of  man.  Mr.  Darwin  is  obliged  to  speak  of  it  as  being  probable 
that  God  at  first  breathed  life  into  two  or  three  forms  :  there  is 
surely,  then,  nothing  inconceivable  or  improbable  in  the  Almighty 
breathing  into  man  the  breath  of  life  and  making  him  a  living 
soul.  These  Scriptures  are  supported  by  a  body  of  evidence, 
external  and  internal,  which  those  who  have  weighed  it  believe 
to  be  far  stronger  than  the  proof  that  can  be  adduced  in  favor 
of  the  hypothesis  of  man  being  produced  by  Natural  Selection. 
Those  who  have  looked  most  carefully  into  their  own  nature  will 
be  ready  to  acknowledge  that  the  Scripture  account,  which  repre- 
sents man  as  formed  out  of  the  dust,  but  with  a  soul  formed  in 


354  APPENDIX. 

the  image  of  God,  is  far  more  accordant  with  our  experience 
than  that  which  would  derive  both  body  and  soul  from  the  lower 
animals.  To  oppose  this,  we  have  only  a  hypothesis  which  ex- 
plains a  number  of  facts,  but  is  acknowledged  not  to  explain  all 
the  facts,  and  to  fail  to  explain  the  facts  relating  to  the  appear- 
ance of  new  powers.  Every  reader  of  Mr.  Darwin's  latest  book 
has  observed  how  often  he  is  obliged  in  his  candor  to  use  the 
epithet  "probably,"  and  to  say,  "it  is  probable."  It  is  ac- 
knowledged that  there  is  no  decisive  fact  to  support  the  theory, 
nothing  of  the  nature  of  an  experimeiitum  crucis.  In  these  cir- 
cumstances, most  men  will  prefer  abiding  by  the  simple  Script- 
ure statement,  rather  than  commit  themselves  to  a  theory  which 
has  so  many  breaks  that  cannot  be  filled  up. 

The  impression  left,  on  reading  the  account  of  the  creation  of 
man  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  is  that  while  man's  higher  nature, 
his  vovq,  which  contemplates  eternal  truth  and  the  infinite  God, 
was  produced  at  once  by  the  breath  of  the  Great  Spirit,  his 
lower  nature,  and  especially  his  body,  may  have  been  formed 
out  of  existing  materials,  it  may  be  by  secondary  causes.  And 
there  is  nothing  unreasonable  in  the  supposition  that  these  sec- 
ondary agencies  may  be  the  same  as  eiTect  the  growth  of  the 
young  in  the  womb.  "  I  will  praise  thee  ;  for  I  am  fearfully  and 
wonderfully  made  :  marvellous  are  thy  works  ;  and  that  my  soul 
knoweth  right  well.  My  substance  was  not  hid  from  thee,  when 
I  was  made  in  secret,  and  curiously  wrought  in  the  lowest  parts 
of  the  earth.  Thine  eyes  did  see  my  substance,  yet  being  un- 
perfect ;  and  in  thy  book  all  my  members  were  written,  which 
in  continuance  were  fashioned,  when  as  yet  there  was  none  of 
them"  (Ps.  cxxxix.  14-16).  The  whole  school  are  fond  of 
appealing  to  the  grand  generalization  of  Von  Baer,  that  the 
growth  of  the  animal  in  the  womb,  that  the  various  stages  which 
it  reaches,  correspond  very  much  to  the  progress  of  the  animal 
races  in  the  geological  ages.  But  I  have  not  been  able  to  dis- 
cover that  they  have  succeeded  in  detecting  the  precise  agen- 
cies which  produce  each  of  the  effects,  and  the  correspondences 
between  them.  There  is  a  mystery  here  which  they  have  not 
cleared  up,  indeed  have  not  attempted  to  clear  up.  The  analogy 
seems  to  me  to  point  to  a  set  of  powers  above  both  the  processes, 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT  OF  MAN.  355 

and  regulating  both.  And  may  there  not  have  been  a  third 
process  analogous  to  the  other  two,  —  the  process  by  which 
man's  body  was  created,  diverse  from  the  animal  body  and  yet 
in  affinity  with  it  ?  There  may  be  an  agency  or  set  of  agencies 
above  natural  selection,  above  even  hereditary  transmission  — 
which  may,  in  fact,  be  ruled  by  it  —  producing,  first,  each  species 
of  animal,  and  the  progressive  advance  of  animals  ;  secondly, 
the  growth  of  animals  in  the  womb  ;  and  finally,  the  animal 
part  of  man.  In  some  such  way  as  this,  by  the  work  "  made  in 
secret,"  and  "curiously  wrought  in  the  lowest  parts  of  the 
earth,"  may  we  get  a  glimpse  of  the  general  causes  which  pro- 
duced the  organs  in  living  beings,  and  in  certain  living  beings 
the  rudiments  of  organs,  —  such  as  the  mamm^  in  the  male  sex, 
—  which  have  not  been  developed  into  utihzed  organs. 

But,  coming  more  closely  to  Mr.  Darwin's  arguments,  we  find 
them  to  amount  to  two  :  one  derived  from  the  resemblances  be- 
tween man  and  the  lower  animals,  and  the  other  from  Sexual 
Selection. 

There  is  a  resemblance  in  the  bodily  structure  of  man  and  the 
lower  animated  creation.  Mr.  Huxley  comes  to  the  conclusion 
that  "  man  in  all  parts  of  his  organization  differs  less  from  the 
higher  apes  than  these  do  from  the  lower  members  of  the  same 
group."  Mr.  Darwin  declares  that,  "  although  man  has  no  just 
right  to  form  a  separate  Order  for  his  own  reception,  he  may 
perhaps  claim  a  distinct  Sub-order,  or  Family  "(Part  I.  c.  vi.). 
The  place  which  man's  body  —  represented  in  Scripture  as 
formed  out  of  the  dust  —  should  hold,  is  a  question  for  compara- 
tive anatomists  to  settle.  If  it  is  determined  that  man's  bodily 
frame  is  of  a  higher  order  than  that  of  the  highest  animal,  then 
they  will  have  to  account  for  the  superiority.  If  they  prove  that 
it  should  be  placed  alongside  that  of  the  apes,  then  they  will 
have  to  account  for  his  great  intellectual  pre-eminence,  which 
cannot  arise  in  this  case  from  the  body,  but  must  come  from 
some  other  quarter. 

Coming  to  the  soul  of  man  and  brute,  we  find  Mr.  Darwin  on 
one  occasion,  when  hard  pressed  with  a  difficulty,  bursting  out 
into  the  declaration,  "  We  really  know  little  about  the  mind  of 
the  lower  animals  "  (Part  II.  c.  xxi.).     We  are  reminded  of  the 


356  APPENDIX. 

famous  saying  of  the  Swiss  philosopher,  that  we  will  never 
be  able  to  know  what  brute  instinct  is  till  we  are  in  the  dog's 
head  without  being  the  dog.  Mr.  Darwin  candidly  acknowledges 
that  he  cannot  trace  the  mental  faculties  from  the  lower  creatures 
up  to  man.  "  Undoubtedly  it  would  have  been  very  interesting 
to  have  traced  the  development  of  each  separate  faculty  from  the 
state  in  which  it  exists  in  the  lower  animals  to  that  in  which  it 
exists  in  man  ;  but  neither  my  ability  nor  knowledge  permit  the 
attempt"  (Part  I.  c.  v.).  Till  the  attempt  is  made,  and  success- 
fully completed,  we  have  no  right  to  assert  that  man's  higher 
powers  are  developed  out  of  animal  powers  ;  nor,  as  Mr.  Dar- 
win maintains,  that  "the  mental  faculties  of  man  and  the  lower 
animals  do  not  differ  in  kind,  though  immensely  in  degree.'' 

I  agree  with  Mr.  Darwin  in  thinking  that  we  cannot  very  well 
distinguish  between  what  is  vaguely  called  "  Instinct,"  and  what 
with  equal  vagueness  is  called  "  Reason."  The  fact  is.  Instinct 
is  merely  a  loose  but  convenient  name  for  a  set  of  operations,  the 
nature  of  which  is  confessedly  very  much  unknown  ;  and  Reason 
has  been  used  to  denote  so  many  different  intellectual  exercises, 
that  we  cannot  very  well  determine  what  we  should  understand 
by  it.  One  thing,  however,  seems  very  clear  to  me  :  that  Instinct 
is  a  complex  operation,  always  implying  a  number  of  agencies 
and  a  concurrence  of  agencies,  and  that  each  of  them  has  its 
laws  or  properties,  which  we  will  never  be  able  to  discover  till 
we  can  separate  the  threads  that  make  up  the  web.  It  may  be 
farther  allowed  that  Instinct  has  always  more  or  less  of  intelli- 
gence in  it ;  that  is,  intelligence  is  involved  as  one  of  the  agencies. 
But  it  has  to  be  added  that  intelligence,  or  Reason,  has  always 
more  or  less  of  Instinct  involved  ;  that  is,  it  knows,  believes,  and 
judges,  without  having  or  being  able  to  give  a  mediate  reason. 

Mr.  Darwin  has  successfully  shown  that  there  is  a  resem- 
blance between  the  intelligence  and  instincts  of  man  on  the 
one  hand,  and  those  of  the  lower  animals  on  the  other.  But 
in  man  those  operations  which  we  call  Instinct  become  fewer, 
and  occupy  a  less  important  position,  while  intelligence  takes  a 
higher  place  ;  and  human  intelligence  is  found  to  have  an  ele- 
ment not  exercised  by  the  ant,  the  horse,  the  dog,  the  elephant, 
the  ape,  or  the  most  advanced  of  the  brute  creation. 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT  OF  MAN.  357 

I  am  convinced  that  in  many  cases  the  intellectual  powers  of 
man  and  the  lower  animals  are  not  identical,  but  simply  analo- 
gous ;  that  is,  they  serve  the  same  end,  but  do  not  follow  the  same 
laws,  or  rather  do  not  proceed  from  precisely  the  same  agencies 
or  properties.  What  I  mean  will  be  understood  when  I  refer  to 
the  circumstance,  familiar  to  every  naturalist,  that  the  wings  of 
a  butterfly  and  the  wings  of  a  bird  are  represented  not  as  the  same 
organs,  but  as  analogous  to  each  other ;  that  is,  both  serve  the 
same  purposes  of  flight,  but  have  not  the  same  structure.  In  like 
manner  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  same  ends  are  accom- 
phshed  in  man  and  brute  by  different  mental  faculties  ;  or  rather 
there  is  a  discerning  or  rational  power  in  the  operation  as  per- 
formed by  man,  which  is  not  in  the  act  as  performed  by  the  inferior 
creatures.  A  rat  is  not  apt  to  be  caught  a  second  time  in  the  same 
trap.  The  horse  in  the  carriage  is  ready  to  start  when  the  door 
is  audibly  closed;  and  Mr.  Darwin  refers  to  a  case  in  which  it 
did  so  when  no  whipping  would  make  it  start.  This  may  seem 
reasoning,  but  it  is  not :  it  arises  merely  from  the  association  of 
ideas,  a  very  inferior  intellectual  operation  to  reasoning.  I 
have  remarked  elsewhere  (Laws  of  Discursive  Thought,  iii.  § 
77),  "  It  is  ever  to  be  understood  that  the  train  of  ideas  raised 
by  association,  while  it  aids  reasoning,  and  is  the  means  of 
enabling  us  to  carry  on  reasoning  so  rapidly,  is  not  in  itself 
reasoning.  Logicians  have  shown  that,  in  all  proper  reasoning, 
the  mind  has  before  it  three  terms,  and  perceives  the  relations 
between  them.  I  believe  that  much  of  what  is  called  reasoning 
in  brutes,  and  even  among  children,  proceeds  from  mere  associa- 
tion. When  the  burnt  child,  and,  we  may  add,  the  burnt  dog, 
dreads  the  fire,  it  is  from  the  mere  law  of  co-existence.  All  their 
lives  men  are  more  or  less  under  the  influence  of  mere  associa- 
tion, when  we  imagine  them  to  be  reasoning.  They  are  led  not 
by  a  concatenated  train  of  discovered  relations,  but  by  mere  im- 
pulse, as  is  said ;  that  is,  by  the  suggestion  which  comes  up. 
Hence  the  mistakes  into  which  they  are  ever  falling,  —  mistakes 
not  to  be  referred  to  the  reasoning  power.  In  all  judgment,  and 
in  reasoning  as  implying  judgment,  there  is  a  perception  of  the 
relations  of  the  notions  to  each  other ;  and  it  is  only  thus  we 
can  reach  a  sound  and  safe  conclusion."     This  is  an  example  of  . 


358  APPENDIX. 

what  I  believe  to  be  very  common, — of  a  higher  mental  power 
being  involved  in  an  operation  performed  by  man,  which,  to  the 
superficial  observer,  may  seem  the  same  as  an  unreasoning  act 
performed  by  one  of  the  lower  animals. 

I  have  doubts  whether  the  lower  animals  can  abstract,  whether 
they  can  generalize.  That  they  can  perceive  resemblances  and 
differences,  and  remember  them,  and  that  they  associate  things 
by  these,  I  have  no  doubt ;  but  that  they  can  form  general 
notions,  and  abstract  notions,  such  as  men  entertain,  —  such  as 
all  men,  even  savages,  are  capable  of  entertaining,  —  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe.  For  what  is  involved  in  a  general  notion,  — 
say  in  the  general  notion,  man  1  Not  merely  that  all  the  beings 
put  into  the  class  resemble  each  other,  but  that  the  beings  pos- 
sess common  properties,  and  that  the  notion  must  embrace  all 
the  objects  possessing  the  common  properties.  In  an  abstract 
notion  it  is  involved  not  merely  that  we  image  a  part  after 
having  perceived  a  whole,  but  that  we  regard  the  part  as  a 
part ;  that  we  regard  rationality  as  an  attribute  of  man.  Such 
general  and  abstract  notions  are  intellectual  exercises  of  a  high 
order,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  lower  animals 
are  capable  of  them.  Abstraction  as  every  one  knows,  is  in- 
volved in  arithmetic.  Men  low  in  the  scale  of  intelligence  can 
proceed  only  a  very  little  way  in  the  employment  of  numbers. 
Still,  with  the  use  of  their  digits,  they  can  rise  to  the  number  five 
or  ten.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  lower  animals 
can  make  any  enumeration.  They  miss  a  person  usually  asso- 
ciated with  others  now  before  them  ;  but  there  is  no  proof  that 
they  can  perform,  or  be  taught  to  perform,  as  even  savages 
can,  such  simple  operations  as  addition  and  subtraction.  The 
school  that  I  am  opposing  are  accustomed  to  ascribe  man's 
superiority  very  much  to  the  power  of  speech.  But  many  of 
the  lower  animals  have  the  power  of  uttering  articulate  sounds. 
"  Parrots,"  says  Locke,  '''  will  be  taught  to  make  articulate 
sounds  enough,  which  yet  are  by  no  means  capable  of  language. 
Besides  articulate  sounds,  therefore,  it  was  further  necessary 
that  man  should  be  able  to  use  these  sounds  as  signs  of  internal 
conceptions,  and  to  make  them  stand  as  marks  of  the  ideas 
within  his   mind."     This   is   the   defect  of   the  lower  animals, 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT  OF  MAN.  359 

lying  not  in  their  vocal  organs,  but  in  the  mental  incapacity  to 
form  the  "  internal  conceptions  "  implied  in  the  intelHgent  use 
of  speech. 

Of  this  I  am  sure,  that  the  lower  animals  cannot  form  those 
lofty  ideas  which  constitute  the  peculiarities,  the  characteristics, 
of  man  :  the  ideas  of  necessary  truth,  of  moral  good  and  in- 
finity, culminating  in  the  idea  of  God.  I  allow  that  the  ideas  of 
this  high  kind  entertained  by  savages  are  of  a  very  vague  and 
meagre  character.  But  they  are  there  (see  Lecture  V.)  in  their 
rudiments,  and  capable  of  being  brought  forth  and  cultivated, 
and  made  to  go  down  by  the  laws  of  hereditary  descent.  Here, 
then,  we  have  an  essential  distinction  between  man  and  the 
lower  animals.  There  are  ideas  which  all  men,  and  no  brutes, 
are  capable  of  forming. 

It  has  often  been  remarked  that  the  lower  animals,  dogs  and 
horses,  act  as  if  they  had  a  conscience.  But  this  arises  simply 
from  their  having  the  accompaniments  of  conscience,  the  feelings 
which  are  associated  with  conscientious  convictions  in  man. 
Much  of  what  seems  conscience  originates  in  the  mere  associ- 
ated hope  of  reward  and  fear  of  penalty.  There  is  no  ground 
for  beheving  that  any  of  the  lower  animals  have  a  sense  of  good 
as  good,  and  of  binding  obligation,  or  a  sense  of  evil  as  evil,  and 
as  deserving  of  disapproval. 

Mr.  Darwin's  theory  of  the  origin  of  our  moral  ideas  is  one 
of  the  loosest  and  most  unsatisfactory,  —  altogether  one  of  the 
weakest  ever  propounded.  It  is  clear  that  he  is  not  at  home  in 
philosophical  and  ethical  subjects,  as  he  is  in  questions  of  nat- 
ural history.  The  following  is  his  summary  of  his  ethical 
theory :  "  A  moral  being  is  one  who  is  capable  of  comparing 
his  past  and  future  actions  and  motives,  —  of  approving  of  some 
and  disapproving  of  others  ;  and  the  fact  that  man  is  the  one 
being,  who,  with  certainty,  can  be  thus  designated,  makes  the 
greatest  of  all  distinctions  between  him  and  the  lower  animals. 
But  in  our  third  chapter  I  have  endeavored  to  show  that  the 
moral  sense  follows,  firstly,  from  the  enduring  and  always  pres- 
ent nature  of  the  social  instincts,  in  which  respect  man  agrees 
with  the  lower  animals  ;  and,  secondly,  from  his  mental  fac- 
ulties being  highly  active,  and  his  impressions  of  past  events 


360  APPENDIX. 

extremely  vivid,  in  which  respects  he  differs  from  the  lower 
animals.  Owing  to  this  condition  of  mind,  man  cannot  avoid 
looking  backwards  and  comparing  the  impressions  of  past  events 
and  actions.  He  also  continually  looks  forward.  Hence,  after 
some  temporary  desire  or  passion  has  mastered  his  social  in- 
stincts, he  will  reflect  and  compare  the  now  weakened  impres- 
sion of  such  past  impulses  with  the  ever  present  social  instinct ; 
and  he  will  then  feel  that  sense  of  dissatisfaction  which  all  un- 
satisfied instincts  leave  behind  them.  Consequently  he  resolves 
to  act  differently  for  .the  future.  And  this  is  conscience.  Any 
instinct  which  is  permanently  stronger  or  more  enduring  than 
another  gives  rise  to  a  feeling  which  we  express  by  saying  that 
it  ought  to  be  obeyed.  A  pointer  dog,  if  able  to  reflect  on  his 
past  conduct,  would  say  to  himself,  I  ought  (as,  indeed,  we  say 
of  him)  to  have  pointed  at  that  hare,  and  not  have  yielded  to 
the  passing  temptation  of  hunting  it."     (Part  II.  c.  xxi.) 

There  is  an  immense  number  of  unfilled-up  breaks  in  this 
process,  far  more  so  than  even  in  his  genealogy  of  man.  That 
the  lower  animals  are  social  beings,  and  that  this  arises  from 
social  instincts,  is  admitted.  But  social  feelings  are  one  thing, 
and  a  sense  of  right  and  wrong  another  thing,  —  quite  as  differ- 
ent as  color  is  from  shape  or  sound.  It  is  the  sense  of  right 
and  wrong  that  constitutes  man  a  moral  and  (taken  along  with 
free  will  and  inteUigence)  a  responsible  being.  It  is  when  man 
has  his  social  and  instinctive  qualities  under  subjection  to  the 
moral  law  revealed  by  conscience  that  he  becomes  a  virtuous 
being.  But  these  higher  qualities  present  in  man  are  wanting 
in  the  lower  animals,  which  are,  in  consequence,  not  moral  or 
accountable  beings.  It  may  even  be  allowed  that  our  moral 
nature  is  intimately  connected  with  our  social  feelings.  Most 
of  our  moral  perceptions  rise  on  the  contemplation  of  social 
relations,  —  our  relations  to  oiir  fellow-men  and  to  God.  But 
they  spring  up  in  breasts  susceptible  of  them  :  they  would  not 
come  forth  in  a  stock  or  a  stone  ;  there  is  no  evidence  that  they 
come  forth  in  the  souls  of  animals.  There  is  no  doubt  that  man 
is  more  incHned  to  look  back  on  the  past,  and  reflect  upon  it, 
than  the  lower  creatures,  which,  I  suspect,  are  not  much  given 
to  musing  or  moralizing.     But  it  is  one  thing  to  look  back  on 


DARWIN'S  DESCENT   OF  MAN.  361 

the  past,  and  another  to  regard  it  as  morally  good  or  evil.  Man 
is  led  to  declare  that  there  is  a  moral  law  which  "  ought  to  be 
obeyed,"  that  there  are  instincts  which  ought  to  be  restrained  ; 
but  there  is  no  evidence  of  such  a  moral  decision  being  come 
to  by  the  pointer  dog,  or  any  other  animal.  The  reference  to 
the  pointer  is  a  clear  evidence  that  Mr.  Darwin  has  not  so  much 
as  weighed  what  is  involved  in  our  moral  perceptions,  judgments, 
and  sentiments,  how  much  is  involved  in  the  idea  of  right  and 
wrong,  of  ought,  obligation,  merit  and  demerit. 

As  the  general  result  of  this  survey,  we  see  that  man  has 
ideas  involving  principles  different  from  any  to  be  found  in  the 
lower  creatures.  The  possession  of  these  puts  man  in  an  en- 
tirely different  order  from  the  brutes  that  perish  :  they  make 
him  a  responsible  being,  and  point  to  and  guarantee  an  immor- 
tality. I  believe  that  man  so  endowed  must  have  come  from 
the  Power  which  created  matter  at  first,  and  added  life  as  the 
ages  rolled  on,  and  gave  the  brutes  their  instincts  or  incipient 
intelligence,  and  crowned  his  works  by  creating  a  moral  and 
responsible  being. 

More  than  one  half  of  the  "  Descent  of  Man  "  is  occupied  with 
an  investigation  of  Sexual  Selection.  The  discussion  of  this 
question  must  be  left  to  those  who  have  given  attention,  as  Mr. 
Darwin  has  done,  to  the  courtship,  the  propagation,  and  do- 
mestication of  animals.  Most-  of  what  he  says  has  no  bearing 
on  the  subjects  discussed  in  these  Lectures.  The  views  which 
he  presents  are  always  ingenious,  but  they  seem  to  me  to  be 
wire-drawn  and  overstretched.  When  animals  have  a  tame, 
dull  hue,  it  is  because  they  are  thereby  less  exposed  to  danger 
than  if  they  had  conspicuous  colors.  If  a  male  has  bright  colors, 
it  is  to  attract  the  female.  He  adds,  however :  "  We  ought  to 
be  cautious  in  concluding  that  colors  which  appear  to  us  dull 
are  not  attractive  to  the  females  of  certain  species.  We  should 
bear  in  mind  such  cases  as  those  of  the  common  house-sparrow, 
in  which  the  male  differs  much  from  the  female,  but  does  not 
exhibit  any  bright  tints."  Female  birds  have  commonly  a  duller 
color,  as  bright  hues  would  expose  them  to  beasts  of  prey  in 
hatching.  Some  males  are  white,  as  thereby  they  are  rendered 
attractive  to  the  females.     But  in  other  cases  black  seems  the 

16 


362  APPENDIX. 

favorite  color.  "It  seems  at  first  sight  a  monstrous  supposi- 
tion that  the  jet  biackness  of  the  negro  has  been  gained  through 
sexual  selection  ;  but  this  view  is  supported  by  various  an- 
alogies, and  we  know  that  negroes  admire  their  own  black- 
ness"  (Part  II.  c.  XX.)  A  law  so  flexible  may  be  drawn  round 
a  great  many  phenomena,  and  seem  to  bind  them.  I  am  sure 
that  in  the  vegetable  kingdom  (which  I  have  studied  more  care- 
fully) there  is  a  beauty  of  flower  which  cannot  have  been  pro- 
duced by  selection  on  the  part  of  man,  for  I  have  seen  it  in 
remote  isles  of  Scotland,  and  virgin  forests  of  America  never 
trodden  by  human  footstej)s  ;  and  this  in  plants  which  cannot 
have  been  aided  by  beauty-loving  insects  carrying  the  pollen. 
And  if  there  be  beauty  in  the  vegetable  kingdom  independent 
of  creature-selection,  there  may  surely  be  the  same  in  the  animal 
kingdom.  Here,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  his  law  explains  so 
much,  but  not  the  whole.  In  all  these  speculations,  —  for  Mr. 
Darwin  acknowledges  that  his  work  is  highly  speculative,— 
there  are  laws  and  operations  implied,  of  which  he  can  give  no 
account  on  his  theory  of  Natural  Selection.  Whence  the 
strong  impulses  of  the  males,  and  the  coyness  of  the  females, 
all  implied  in  the  laws  which  he  illustrates,  that  the  male  needs 
gay  colors  and  showy  forms  to  attract  the  female,  who  does  not 
require  these  ?  Whence  the  love  of  the  beautiful  in  the  female, 
the  love  of  certain  colors  and  certain  forms,  an  anticipation  of 
the  higher  aesthetics  among  cultivated  minds  t  Whence  that  love 
of  music  appearing  in  birds,  and  becoming  so  cultivated  and 
elevating  a  taste  in  advanced  humanity  ?  In  the  way  in  which 
all  these  things  have  appeared,  and  in  the  forms  which  they 
have  taken,  and  in  the  mutual  adaptations  of  all  things  to  one 
another,  and  to  seasons  and  circumstances,  I  delight  to  trace  a 
presiding  Intelligence,  foreseeing  all  things  from  the  beginning, 
and  guidinc:  them  towards  a  erand  and  beneficent  end. 


Ai't.  III.    On  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer's  Philosophy. 

Mr.  Spencer  is  acknowledged,  on  all  hands,  to  be  a  powerful 
speculative  thinker.     Give  him  a  set  of  facts,  and  he  at  once 


MR.    SPENCER'S  PHILOSOPHY.  363 

proceeds  to  generalize  them,  and  devise  a  theory  to  account  for 
them.  He  evidently  regards  it  as  his  function  to  unify  the  meta- 
physics of  the  day  and  the  grand  discoveries  lately  made  in  phys 
ical  science.  He  is  fond  of  declaring  that  a  number  of  the  great 
laws  announced  in  our  day  as  the  result  of  a  long  course  ot 
inductive  investigation,  such  as  that  of  the  Conservation  oi 
Physical  Force,  can  be  discovered  by  a  priori  cogitation.  His 
strength  is  his  weakness.  Instead  of  proceeding,  as  Bacon  rec- 
ommends, gradatim  from  lower  to  higher  axioms,  and  only  in 
the  end  to  the  highest  of  all,  he  mounts  at  once  to  the  very  lof- 
tiest generalizations.  My  friend  Hugh  Millei  said  of  an  author, 
that  in  his  argument  there  was  an  immense  number  oi  fa'en 
steeks  (fallen  stitches)  :  the  language  might  be  applied  to  Mr. 
Spencer's  philosophy.  It  may  be  safely  said  of  some  of  his 
high  speculations,  that  they  will  not  be  either  proven  or  dis- 
proven  for  ages. 

I.  He  proceeds  on  the  philosophy  of  Sir  Wilham  Hamilton 
and  Dr.  Mansel,  maintaining  that  all  our  knowledge  is  Relative  ; 
turning  the  doctrine  to  a  very  diiferent  purpose  from  that  contem- 
plated by  the  Edinburgh  and  Oxford  metaphysicians.  Hamihon 
thought  that  the  doctrine  of  Relativity,  with  the  consequent 
ignorance  of  the  nature  of  things,  might  be  applied  to  humble 
the  pride  of  the  intellect ;  Mansel  used  it  to  undermine  religious 
rationalism;  and  Spencer  employs  it,  perhaps  more  logically 
than  either,  to  show  that  God,  if  there  be  a  God,  is  unknowable. 
I  have  been  laboring  in  these  Lectures  (see  IV.,  V.),  and  in 
my  works  generally  (Meth.  of  Div.  Gov.,  App.  VI. ;  Intuitions, 
Part  III.  B.  I.  c.  iii.  §  6),  to  show  that  the  doctrine,  as  advocated 
by  these  metaphysicians,  is  not  a  true  one  ;  and  I  am  thus  pre- 
pared to  reject  that  structure  which  Mr.  Spencer  would  rear 
upon  it.  We  know  self  directly  in  the  state  in  which  it  is  at  the 
time,  and  not  merely  in  relation  to  something  else  declared  to  be 
unknown. 

2.  It  follows  that  there  is  nothing  inconceivable  or  contradic- 
tory, as  the  school  maintains  that  there  is,  in  such  ideas  as  Self- 
Existence  and  First  Cause.  We  know  ourselves  as  existing, 
and  can  thence  conceive  of  others,  of  God,  as  existing.  We 
certainly  do  not  know  ourselves  as  self-existing,  because  we  dis- 


364  APPENDIX. 

cover  that  we  are  caused  ;  but  we  can  conceive  —  I  mean,  think 
and  beHeve  —  that  God,  while  he  exists,  is  uncaused.  I  beheve 
that  all  causation  carries  us  to  a  substance  with  powers.  The 
substances  we  see  on  earth  are  evidently  derived  ;  but,  as  we 
mount  up,  we  come  to  an  underived  substance,  —  and  this  with- 
out falling  even  into  an  apparent  contradiction.  The  whole  of 
these  alleged  contradictions,  so  much  dwelt  on  by  Hamilton  in 
his  "  Discussions,"  and  Mansel  in  his  "  Bampton  Lectures," 
and  Spencer  in  the  opening  of  his  "  First  Principles,"  are  con- 
tradictions simply  in  the  propositions  of  the  metaphysicians,  and 
not  at  all  in  the  actual  laws  or  beliefs  of  the  human  mind. 

3.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  he  is  entitled  to  say  that  there 
is  an  unknown  reality  beyond  the  known  phenomena.  I  have 
referred  to  this  in  Lecture  VL  I  must  leave  the  farther  discus- 
sion of  it  to  his  school,  some  of  whom  will  deny  that  he  can  on 
his  principles  know  so  certainly  that  there  is  an  unknown. 

4.  I  have  shown,  in  the  same  Lecture,  that  the  fundamental 
verities  in  the  mind,  properly  interpreted,  lead  us  to  a  God  so 
far  known.  He  talks  of  our  knowing  certain  things,  and  says 
(First  Prin.  p.  143),  "All  things  known  to  us  are  manifestations 
of  the  unknowable  ;  "  and  (p.  170)  that  force  is  "  a  certain  con- 
ditioned effect  of  unconditioned  cause  ;  "  and  (p.  165)  "  our  con- 
ception of  space  is  produced  by  some  mode  of  the  unknowable  ;  " 
and  he  speaks  (p.  168)  of  "  the  unknown  cause  which  produces  in 
us  the  effects  called  Matter,  Space,  Time,  and  Motion."  I  hold 
that  a  cause  thus  known  is  so  far  known. 

5.  He  utterly  fails  to  account  on  his  principles,  though  he 
seems  to  be  doing  so,  for  some  of  the  most  certain  of  known 
phenomena,  such  as  Sensation,  Nervous  Action,  Life,  and  Con- 
sciousness. 

Sensation.  —  Among  all  the  laws  mentioned  by  him,  such  as 
the  Persistence  of  Force,  Instability  of  the  Homogeneous,  no 
one  is  in  the  least  degree  fitted  to  produce  this  common  phenom- 
enon, experienced  by  all  of  us,  in  the  shape  of  pleasure  and 
pain.     This  is  one  of  the  most  patent  of  the  gaps  in  his  system. 

Nervous  Action.  —  He  tells  us  (First  Prin.  p.  476)  that, 
through  the  "continuous  sorting  and  grouping  together  of 
changes  or  motions  which  constitutes  nervous  function,  there  is 


MR.    SPENCER'S  PHILOSOPHY.  365 

gradually  wrought  that  sorting  and  grouping  together  of  matter 
which  constitutes  nervous  structure."  Here,  as  in  so  many 
other  cases,  he  misses  the  differentia  of  what  he  would  explain. 
There  are  everywhere  instances  of  "continuous  sorting  and 
grouping  together  of  changes  or  motions," — we  have  it,  I 
believe,  in  the  molecular  motion  of  every  body,  —  without  those 
peculiar  operations  found  in  the  nerves,  sensor  or  motor,  affer- 
ent or  efferent. 

Life.  —  He  tells  us  (Biology,  vol.  i.  pp.  1-3)  that  organic  bod- 
ies are  composed  mainly  of  ultimate  units,  having  extreme 
mobility.  Three  of  the  elements,  oxygen,  hydrogen,  and  nitro- 
gen, are  known  only  in  the  aeriform  state,  and  defy  all  efforts  to 
liquefy  them.  Three  of  them  again,  hydrogen,  carbon,  and  nitro- 
gen, have  affinities  that  are  narrow  in  their  range  and  low  in  their 
intensity ;  while  oxygen  displays  a  very  high  chemical  energy. 
Thus  these  two  extreme  contrasts  —  the  one  between  physical 
mobihties,  the  other  between  chemical  activities  —  fulfil,  in  the 
highest  degree,  a  certain  farther  condition  of  facility  of  differen- 
tiation and  integration.  He  discovers  —  and  I  beheve  he  is 
right  —  a  significance  in  this.  It  is  part  of  the  means  by  which 
organisms  fulfil  their  functions,  specially  the  phenomena  of 
evolution.  But  while  such  properties  are  conditions  which  ena- 
ble hfe  to  work,  they  certainly  do  not  constitute  life, —  still  less  are 
they  fitted  to  produce  the  beauteous  and  bounteous  forms  of  life 
which  we  see  around  us  :  they  might  have  been  wasted  quite  as 
readily  in  producing  ugly  or  useless  products. 

Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  define  "  Life,"  to  show 
what  it  consists  in.  Most  of  these  have  been  unsuccessful ;  but 
the  most  unsuccessful  of  them  all  is  Mr.  Spencer's.  I  quote  his 
own  account  of  his  efforts,  given  in  his  "  Psychology,"  Part  III. 
c.  i.  :  "  In  Part  I.  c.  iv.  of  the  '  Principles  of  Biology,'  the  prox- 
imate idea  we  arrived  at  was,  that  Life  is  'the  definite  combina- 
tion of  heterogeneous  changes,  both  simultaneous  and  successive.' 
In  the  next  chapter,  it  was  shown  that,  to  develop  this  proxi- 
mate idea  into  a  complete  idea,  it  is  needful  to  recognize  the 
connection  between  these  actions  going  on  within  an  organism, 
and  the  actions  going  on  without  it.  We  saw  that  life  is  ade- 
quately conceived  only  when  we  think  of  it  as  '  the  definite 


366  APPENDIX. 

combination  of  heterogeneous  changes,  both  simultaneous  and 
successive,  in  correspondences  with  external  co-existences  and 
sequences.'  Afterwards,  this  definition  was  found  to  be  reduci- 
ble to  the  briefer  definition,  '  The  continuous  adjustment  of 
internal  relations  to  external  relations  ; '  and  though,  by  leaving 
out  the  characteristic  of  heterogeneity,  this  definition  is  rendered 
somewhat  too  wide,  so  that  it  includes  a  few  non-vital  phenomena 
which  stimulate  vitality,  yet  practically  no  error  is  likely  to  result 
from  its  use."  The  definition  would  apply  to  the  appearance 
of  meteors  within  our  atmosphere  in  autumn,  to  the  simultaneous 
springing  of  buds,  or  the  arrival  of  migrating  birds,  in  spring,  to 
the  issuing  of  bees  from  the  hive  when  it  swarms,  or  even  to  the 
arrival  of  the  elected  of  the  people  to  the  House  of  Commons  in 
London,  or  the  House  of  Representatives  in  Washington.  The 
last  form  of  the  definition  would  apply  to  a  man  putting  on  his 
clothes  and  keeping  them  clean,  or  the  housewife  suiting  her 
dwelhng  to  its  surroundings.  In  all  of  them  the  essential  ele- 
ment of  life  is  omitted  ;  and,  in  accounting  for  the  things  he  has 
defined,  he  has  not  accounted  for  life. 

Consciousness. —  Still  less  among  all  his  laws,  which  are,  after 
all,  mere  generalized  facts  of  physical  nature,  has  he  any  means 
of  producing  knowledge,  —  the  knowledge  which  the  mind  takes 
of  things  without  it,  and  of  itself  and  its  own  operations.  Be- 
cause force  persists,  it  does  not  follow  that  we  should  come  to 
know  force,  or  power,  or  goodness.  If  he  attribute  these,  as  I 
believe  he  does,  to  a  cause  beyond  sensible  phenomena,  I  agree 
with  him  ;  but  then  the  power  which  did  this  is  so  far  known 
to  us. 

Intelligence.  —  In  "  Psychology,"  Part  III.  c.  ix.,  he  says  that 
every  act  of  inteUigence  is  "in  essence  an  adjustment  of  inner 
to  outer  relations."  Surely  the  very  "  essence  "  of  intelligence 
is  lost  sight  of  in  such  a  definition.  It  is  still  more  vague  and 
unsatisfactory  than  his  definition  of  Life.  It  would  apply  to  the 
adjustment  of  a  letter  to  its  envelope,  of  a  picture  to  its  frame, 
of  a  jewel  to  its  casket,  of  a  tree  to  the  climate.  In  Part  IV.  c.  vi., 
he  says,  "  Each  act  of  recollection  is  the  establishment  of  an 
inner  relation,  answering  to  some  outer  relation."  When  I  recol- 
lect that  at  a  certain  time  I  was  happy,  and  at  another  time  I 


MR.    SPENCER'S  PHTLOSOPHT.  367 

was  unhappy,  I  discover  some  inner,  but  I  see  no  outer  rela- 
tions. 

6.  He  cannot  account  for  our  higher  ideas,  such  as  those  of 
Power  and  Moral  Good.  He  says  (First  Prin.  p.  22)  "  that  the 
disciples  of  Kant  and  those  of  Locke  have  both  their  views 
recognized  in  the  theory  that  organized  experiences  produce 
forms  of  thought."  Now  I  admit  that  experiences  may  come  to 
descend  in  the  shape  of  tendencies,  —  tendencies  to  act  in  a 
particular  way ;  as,  for  example,  in  a  disposition  to  hoard  or  to 
spend,  to  show  cunning  or  courage.  But  there  is  no  evidence 
that  they  can  produce  what  is  meant  by  a  "  form  of  thought ;  " 
but  which  might  better  be  denominated  a  first  truth,  or  first 
principle,  or  a  fundamental  law  of  belief  First,  there  is  no  proof 
that  the  brutes  have  any  of  those  forms  of  thought  which  higher 
metaphysicians  discover  in  man,  —  as  the  necessary  conviction 
that  every  event  must  have  a  cause,  and  the  ethical  principle  that 
good  is  meritorious  and  rewardable,  and  that  sin  is  of  evil  desert 
and  punishable.  The  lower  animals  nowhere  appear  with  these 
forms  of  thought,  and  man  is  found  everywhere  with  them.  Any 
tendencies  which  man  may  acquire  by  organized  experiences  are 
not  of  the  nature  of  a  fundamental  law  of  thought,  belief,  or  judg- 
ment They  are  rather  tastes  and  predilections,  or  tribal  and 
national  characteristics,  acquired  in  the  first  instance  by  individ- 
uals, and  going  down  from  one  generation  to  another.  They 
have  no  reference  to  beliefs  or  truths,  but  are  mere  inclinations 
seeking  gratification  and  impelling  to  action.  They  do  not  carry 
with  them  self-evidence  or  necessity  of  thought.  Whereas  the 
forms  of  thought,  in  the  philosophic  use  of  the  term,  carry  with 
them  their  own  evidence  ;  are  common  to  all  men,  are  catholic 
or  universal ;  are  found  working  in  children  as  well  as  among 
persons  arrived  at  mature  life,  among  savages  as  well  as  civilized 
men.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  explain  that,  in  adult  and  civil- 
ized life,  they  have  higher  applications  than  among  children  or 
barbarians  ;  but  they  are  ever  operating  in  the  one  class  as  in 
the  other. 

7.  He  places  very  heterogeneous  objects  and  operations  in  his 
wide  generalizations.  To  mention  only  a  few  :  He  is  speaking 
CFirst  Prin.,  Part  II.  c.  viii.)  of  the  Transformation  and  Equiva- 


368  APPENDIX. 

lence  of  Forces,  meaning  Physical  Forces  ;  and  he  passes  on,  as 
if  they  were  the  same,  to  Mental  and  Moral  and  Social  Forces, 
which  are  regulated  by  mental  laws  and  by  motives.  He  tells 
us  that  "  a  small  society,  no  matter  how  superior  the  character 
of  its  members,  cannot  exhibit  the  same  quantity  of  social  action 
as  a  large  one."  As  if  the  Jews,  the  Athenians,  the  Dutch,  the 
Scotch,  the  Puritans,  though  comparatively  small  peoples,  had 
not  exerted  a  very  powerful  social  influence.  Then  he  shows,  as 
if  it  were  all  done  by  an  accumulation  of  physical  force,  that, 
when  there  is  an  unusually  abundant  harvest,  capital  seeks 
investment,  labor  is  expended,  and  new  channels  of  commerce 
are  opened,  while  there  are  more  marriages  and  an  increase  of 
population. 

In  c.  ix.  he  is  speaking  of  the  Direction  of  Motion,  and 
assures  us  that  "volition  is  itself  an  incipient  discharge  along  a 
line  which  previous  experiences  have  rendered  a  line  of  least 
resistance  ;  and  the  passing  of  volition  into  action  is  simply  a  com- 
pletion of  the  discharge  ;  "  and  he  goes  on  to  explain,  in  the  same 
way,  a  great  number  of  social  phenomena,  such  as  "  the  flow  of 
capital  into  business  yielding  the  largest  returns."  That  there 
may  be  no  misapprehension,  he  says  :  "  By  some  it  may  be  said 
that  the  term  force,  as  here  used,  is  used  metaphorically,  —  that 
to  speak  of  men  as  iinpelled  in  certain  directions,  by  certain 
desires,  is  a  figure  of  speech,  and  not  the  statement  of  a  physical 
fact.  The  reply  is,  that  the  foregoing  illustrations  are  to  be 
interpreted  literally,  and  that  the  processes  described  are  phys- 
ical ones." 

In  c.  xxi.  his  subject  is  Segregation  ;  and  he  is  showing  how, 
in  physical  operation,  there  is  an  advance  from  the  indefinite  to 
the  definite,  and  then  accounts  on  this  principle  for  the  separa- 
tion of  races.  "  Human  motions,  like  all  other  motions,  being 
determined  by  the  distribution  of  forces,  it  follows  that  such 
segregations  of  races  as  are  not  produced  by  incident  external 
forces  are  produced  by  forces  which  the  units  of  the  races  exer- 
cise on  each' other." 

It  is  by  such  loose  analogies,  represented  as  identities,  that 
he  is  able  so  easily  to  account  for  the  production  of  the  universe 
by  a  few  wide  laws. 


MR,    SPENCERS  PHILOSOPHY.  369 

8.  In  his  construction  of  the  universe,  he  fails  to  discover  the 
need  of  adjustments,  in  order  that  the  forces  may  accomphsh 
beneficent  ends.  He  seems  to  derive  every  thing  from  what  he 
calls  the  "  Persistence  of  Force,"  which  is  the  name  he  adopts 
to  express  what  is  usually  called  the  Conservation  of  Force  ; 
that  is,  the  sum  of  force  in  the  universe,  potential  and  actual, 
is  one  and  the  same,  and  when  a  force  disappears  in  one  form, 
it  must  appear  in  another.  But  every  one  sees  that,  but  for  a 
regulated  channel  provided  for  it,  blind  force  might  operate  in 
destructive  quite  as  readily  as  beneficent  modes.  The  same 
remark  holds  good  of  such  laws  as  that  a  body  follows  the  path 
of  "  Least  Resistance,"  —  that  is,  in  which  there  is  least  opposing 
force;. the  Instabihty  of  the  Homogeneous,  —  that  is,  with  the 
varied  operating  forces,  bodies  are  not  likely  to  continue  in  a 
state  of  rest ;  the  Rhythm  of  Motion,  —  that  is,  that  many  bodies 
liable  to  be  driven  or  pulled  in  a  number  of  ways  will  proceed  in 
curves  of  various  kinds.  He  shows  that  from  the  forces  operat- 
ing there  must  be  such  operations,  as  Segregation,  Equilibration, 
Dissolution.  But  all  these,  but  for  adjustments,  are  as  capable 
of  producing  wasting  as  construction  and  benignity.  That  they 
are  made  to  work  as  they  do,  I  believe  Mr.  Spencer  would 
ascribe  to  the  action  of  the  unknown  reality.  But  when  1  see 
order,  harmon}^,  and  happiness  everywhere  in  nature,  I  argue 
the  reality  from  which  it  proceeds  must  possess  wisdom  and 
beneficence. 


Cambridge  :  Press  of  John  Wilson  &  Son. 


UNION    THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARY, 


New  York. 


THE     ELY    LECTURESHIP 


Clje  (Elnlrences  of  Cijrfetianitp. 


SECOND    SERIES. 


By  JAMES    McCOSH,  D.D.,  LL.D. 


WORKS    BY    DR.    McCOSH 


I. 

THE  METHOD  OF  THE  DIVINE  GOVERN 
MENT,  Physical  and  Moral.     8vo.     $2.50. 

"  It  is  refreshing  to  read  a  work  so  distinguished  for  originahty  and  soundness  of 
thinking,  especially  as  coming  from  an  author  of  our  own  country."  —  Sir  IVilliajH 
Hamilton. 

"  This  work  is  distinguished  from  other  similar  ones  by  its  being  based  upon  a 
thorough  study  of  physical  science,  and  an  accurate  knowledge  of  its  present  condition, 
and  by  its  entering  in  a  deeper  and  more  unfettered  manner  than  its  predecessors  upon 
the  discussion  of  the  appropriate  psychological,  ethical,  and  theological  questions. 
The  author  keeps  aloof  at  once  from  the  a  priori  idealism  and  dreaminess  of  German 
speculation  since  Schelling,  and  from  the  one-sidedness  and  narrowness  of  the  em- 
piricism and  positivism  which  have  so  prevailed  in  England.  In  the  provinces  of 
psychology  and  ethics  he  follows  conscientiously  the  facts  of  consciousness,  and  draws 
his  conclusions  of  them  commonly  with  penetration  and  logical  certainty." — Dr. 
Ulrici,  ill  Zeitschrift  fur  Philosophie. 

II. 

TYPICAL  FORMS  AND  SPECIAL  ENDS  IN 
CREATION.  By  James  McCosh,  LL.D.,  and  Dr.  Dickie. 
8vo.     $2.50. 

*'  It  is  alike  comprehensive  in  its  range,  accurate  and  minute  in  its  details,  original 
in  its  structure,  and  devout  and  spirited  in  its  tone  and  tendency.  It  illustrates  and 
carries  out  the  great  principle  of  analogy  in  the  Divine  plans  and  works,  far  more 
minutely  and  satisfactorily  than  it  has  been  done  before ;  and  while  it  presents  the 
results  of  the  most  profound  scientific  research,  it  presents  them  in  their  higher  and 
spiritual  relations."  —  A  rgtis. 

III. 

THE    INTUITIONS    OF    THE    MIND.     New  and 

Improved  edition.     8vo.     $3.00. 

"  No  philosopher,  before  Dr.  McCosh,  has  clearly  brought  out  the  stages  by  which 
an  original  and  individual  intuition  passes  first  into  an  articulate  but  still  individual 
judgment,  and  then  into  a  universal  maxim  or  principle  ;  and  no  one  has  so  clearly  or 
completely  classified  and  enumerated  our  intuitive  convictions,  or  exhibited  in  detail 
their  relations  to  the  various  sciences  which  repose  on  them  as  their  foundations 
The  amount  of  summarized  information  which  it  contains  is  very  great ;  and  it  is  the 
only  work  on  the  very  important  subject  with  which  it  deals.  Never  was  such  a  work 
so  much  needed  as  in  the  present  day.  It  is  the  only  scientific  work  adapted  to  coun- 
teract the  school  of  Mill,  Bain,  and  Herbert  Spencer,  which  is  so  steadily  prevailing 
among  the  students  of  the  present  generation."  —  London  Quarterly  Review,  Ap>ril 
1S65. 


WORKS    BY   DR.    McCOSn. 


IV. 

A    DEFENCE     OF     FUNDAMENTAL     TRUTH. 

Being  an  Examination  of  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill's  Philosophy.     8vo. 
$3.00. 

"  The  spirit  of  these  discussions  is  admirable.  Fearless  and  courteous,  McCosh 
never  hesitates  to  bestow  praise  when  merited,  nor  to  attack  a  heresy  wherever  found." 
—  Cong.  Review. 

V. 

ACADEMIC  TEACHING  IN  EUROPE:  Being 
Dr.  McCosh's  Address  at  his  Inauguration  as  President  of 
the  College  of  New  Jersey.     50  cents. 

VI. 

LAWS    OF    DISCURSIVE    THOUGHT:    Being  a 

Text-book  of  Formal  Logic.     i2mo.     $1.50. 

"  The  position  from  which  Dr.  McCosh  was  called  to  America  was  the  professoi- 
ship  of  Logic  and  Metaphysics  in  Queen's  College,  Belfast ;  and  this  volume  of  two 
hundred  pages  is  the  fruit  of  his  study  and  experience  in  the  department  of  logic. 
It  is  therefore  a  condensed  but  exhaustive  exhibition  of  the  principles  of  the  science 
which  he  has  more  thoroughly  mastered  than  perhaps  any  other  living  man.  He 
has  made  that  careful  inductive  investigation  of  the  operations  of  the  human  mind 
which  is  essential  to  the  constitution  of  the  science,  and  freely  avowing  his  regard  for 
the  old  logic,  which  no  modern  improvements  have  overthrown,  he  is  fully  in  harmony 
with  whatever  the  greatest  thinkers  of  subsequent  ages,  even  of  our  own  times,  have 
contributed  to  the  subject.  The  book  is  admirably  adapted  to  the  use  of  classes 
in  schools  and  colleges,  where  it  will  readily  and  rapidly  find  its  way."  —  N.  V. 
Observer. 

VII. 

CHRISTIANITY  AND  POSITIVISM.  A  Series  of 
Lectures  to, the  Times  on  Natural  Theology  and  Apologetics. 
i2mo.     $1.75. 


ROBERT    CARTER    AND    BROTHERS, 

New  York. 


